Pressure Ulcers and Sepsis in Oregon Nursing Homes

A pressure ulcer starts as a small area of skin over a bony prominence — a heel, a hip, the base of the spine — that stays under pressure too long. Left unrelieved, the tissue breaks down and the wound can deepen through fat and muscle to bone. Once bacteria reach the bloodstream, a wound problem becomes a systemic one; sepsis and osteomyelitis are the results families most often hear about.

Pressure injuries develop gradually and visibly, which is why they attract legal attention: the progression leaves a record.

This article explains how Oregon law approaches these cases, not any particular resident's situation.

Two different legal routes, with very different terms

Oregon offers more than one framework for a long-term care case, and they are not interchangeable.

The first is an ordinary negligence claim — that the facility or its staff failed to meet the standard of care in preventing, staging, or treating the wound.

The second is a statutory claim for abuse of a vulnerable person under ORS 124.100. It carries better terms for a plaintiff and correspondingly narrower requirements, and the difference is frequently misunderstood.

The statutory abuse claim carries enhanced damages

ORS 124.100 creates a civil action for a vulnerable person, which under ORS 124.100(3) "may be brought under this section only by" "(a) A vulnerable person; (b) A guardian, conservator or attorney-in-fact for a vulnerable person; (c) A personal representative for the estate of a decedent who was a vulnerable person at the time the cause of action arose; or (d) A trustee for a trust on behalf of the trustor or the spouse of the trustor who is a vulnerable person."¹

The remedies make it distinctive. On prevailing, ORS 124.100(2) provides for "[a]n amount equal to three times all economic damages … resulting from the physical or financial abuse, or $500, whichever amount is greater," "[a]n amount equal to three times all noneconomic damages … resulting from the physical or financial abuse," and "[r]easonable attorney fees incurred by the plaintiff."¹

The limitations period is also markedly longer. ORS 124.130 provides that "[a]n action under ORS 124.100 to 124.140 must be commenced within seven years after discovery of the conduct described in ORS 124.105 and 124.110 that gives rise to a cause of action under ORS 124.100 to 124.140."¹

Treble damages, attorney fees and seven years from discovery are a meaningfully different proposition from an ordinary negligence claim — which is why the statute's threshold matters.

What the statute actually counts as physical abuse

Here is the point most often gotten wrong. The trebling attaches to damages "resulting from the physical or financial abuse" — not to negligence generally.¹ And ORS 124.105 defines physical abuse by enumeration, listing specific conduct: assault, menacing, recklessly endangering another person, criminal mistreatment, several sexual offenses, and strangulation, each by reference to its criminal statute.² Subsection (2) adds "unreasonable physical constraint" and "prolonged or continued deprivation of food or water," and subsection (3) addresses physical or chemical restraint and psychotropic medication without proper authorization.²

Ordinary neglect does not appear on that list under that name. A facility that simply failed to turn a resident often enough has not, by that fact alone, committed one of the enumerated acts — which is why the statutory claim is not automatically available in every pressure-injury case.

Where withheld care can meet the definition

The list does include criminal mistreatment, and that item reaches conduct that looks like severe neglect.

ORS 163.200 defines criminal mistreatment in the second degree. It applies where a person acting with criminal negligence, and either in violation of a legal duty to provide care or "[h]aving assumed the permanent or temporary care, custody or responsibility for the supervision of another person," withholds "necessary and adequate food, physical care or medical attention from that person."³

ORS 163.205 defines criminal mistreatment in the first degree, which requires that the person act intentionally or knowingly rather than with criminal negligence. Its first prong reaches withholding necessary and adequate food, physical care or medical attention from another person; a separate prong addresses conduct toward a dependent person or elderly person. The section defines a "[d]ependent person" as "a person who because of either age or a physical or mental disability is dependent upon another to provide for the person's physical needs."³

So the character of the conduct and the mental state, rather than the severity of the wound alone, determine whether conduct falls within the enumerated list. Withholding necessary and adequate physical care or medical attention is the operative language, and criminal negligence versus intentional or knowing conduct separates the two degrees.

A bar that matters enormously in a nursing home case

One further provision is specific to facilities, and it changes the picture.

ORS 124.115 is titled "Persons not subject to action." Subsection (1) provides that "an action under ORS 124.100 may not be brought against: (a) Financial institutions, as defined by ORS 706.008; (b) A health care facility, as defined in ORS 442.015; (c) Any facility licensed or registered under ORS chapter 443; or (d) Broker-dealers licensed under ORS 59.005 to 59.505."⁴

Paragraphs (b) and (c) cover the institutions these cases are usually about. Subsection (2) supplies the only openings: an action "may be brought under ORS 124.100 against a person listed in subsection (1) of this section if: (a) The person is convicted of one of the crimes specified in ORS 124.105 (1); or (b) The person engages in conduct constituting financial abuse as described in ORS 124.110, and the person is convicted of a crime by reason of the conduct."⁴

The consequence is frequently misstated. Against a licensed facility itself, the treble-damages action is not available on a showing of abusive conduct alone — the statute conditions it on a criminal conviction. The enhanced remedy is therefore far narrower in the nursing home setting than a general description of ORS 124.100 would suggest.

The negligence route, and its shorter clock

Where the statutory threshold is not met, the claim proceeds as a negligence claim, and the deadlines are tighter.

Under ORS 12.110(1), most personal-injury actions "shall be commenced within two years."⁵ Where the injury arises from medical treatment, ORS 12.110(4) governs actions "arising from any medical, surgical or dental treatment, omission or operation …", requiring commencement "within two years from the date when the injury is first discovered or in the exercise of reasonable care should have been discovered," with an outer limit: "However, notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 12.160, every such action shall be commenced within five years from the date of the treatment, omission or operation upon which the action is based …"⁵

Which subsection applies depends on the care at issue, and long-term care settings can involve both nursing and medical treatment.

Where physicians are involved in the resident's care, ORS 677.095(1) supplies the standard: a physician licensed to practice medicine or podiatry by the Oregon Medical Board "has the duty to use that degree of care, skill and diligence that is used by ordinarily careful physicians in the same or similar circumstances in the community of the physician or a similar community."⁶

When the resident dies

Sepsis arising from a pressure injury is frequently fatal in a frail resident, and the claim then moves under Oregon's wrongful-death statute. ORS 30.020(1) places the action with the personal representative and requires it to be commenced within three years after the injury causing the death is discovered or reasonably should have been discovered, providing that "[i]n no case may an action be commenced later than the earliest of: (a) Three years after the death of the decedent; or (b) The longest of any other period for commencing an action under a statute of ultimate repose that applies to the act or omission causing the injury, including but not limited to the statutes of ultimate repose provided for in ORS 12.110 (4), 12.115, 12.135, 12.137 and 30.905."⁷

That period runs from discovery, and a long-term care case shows how early it starts. In Logan v. Waterford Operations, LLC, 340 Or App 528 (2025), a personal representative learned on or before May 23, 2019 that staff at a nursing facility had failed to act on what the opinion calls "bad lab results." Her mother died on June 3, 2019, and the complaint was filed exactly three years after the death. The Court of Appeals held the action untimely: "Because plaintiff had actual knowledge of legally cognizable harm by May 23, 2019, the three-year statute of limitations for plaintiff's wrongful death action began to run no later than that date, not almost two weeks later when her mother died."⁸

Quoting the Oregon Supreme Court in Martineau v. McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center, 371 Or 247 (2023), the court noted that a wrongful death action under ORS 30.020(1) "may arise for statute of limitations purposes while the decedent is still alive."⁸ In a pressure-injury case, charted over weeks or months, that can happen well before the death.

Note that ORS 124.100(3)(c) allows a personal representative to bring the statutory abuse action for the estate of a decedent who was a vulnerable person when the cause of action arose.¹ The two routes can therefore both remain relevant after a death, on different timetables.

What the chart usually shows

Pressure injuries are staged, measured and photographed in the ordinary course of long-term care. The record generally shows when the wound was first documented, what stage it was assigned, how often position changes and skin assessments were charted, whether a wound care consult was ordered, and when infection was recognized. Because the injury develops over time, that sequence tends to carry the case — in either direction.

This article is educational

This article describes Oregon law in general terms. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Time limits matter. Most Oregon personal-injury and auto-accident claims must be filed within two years of the injury or accident. Medical malpractice claims must be filed within two years of when you knew or reasonably should have known of the negligence, with an outer limit of five years from the act itself (with a fraud exception). Wrongful death claims must be filed within three years of the date of death. Claims against public bodies (cities, counties, state agencies, public hospitals) require a notice of claim within 180 days. Missing these deadlines typically ends a case.

If you think you may have a claim, call Huegli Law at 971-317-6436 for a free case review. Todd Huegli is licensed in Oregon and consults on cases in Oregon only.

Footnotes

1. ORS 124.100 and ORS 124.130 (ORS chapter 124 — abuse prevention). https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors124.html ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵

2. ORS 124.105 (ORS chapter 124 — abuse prevention). https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors124.html ↩ ↩²

3. ORS 163.200 and ORS 163.205 (ORS chapter 163 — offenses against persons). https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors163.html ↩ ↩²

4. ORS 124.115 — Persons not subject to action. https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors124.html ↩ ↩²

5. ORS 12.110 and ORS 12.160 (ORS chapter 12 — limitations of actions). https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors012.html ↩ ↩²

6. ORS 677.095 — Duty of care. https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors677.html ↩

7. ORS 30.020 — Action for wrongful death. https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors030.html ↩

8. Logan v. Waterford Operations, LLC, 340 Or App 528 (2025) (slip opinion PDF). https://storage.courtlistener.com/pdf/2025/05/14/logan_v._waterford_operations_llc.pdf ↩ ↩²