Oregon Judge Allows Suit Filed by 29 Women to Proceed Against Ex-Doctor December 18, 2020
A judge has denied a request by a former suburban Portland, Ore. doctor to put a two-year hold on a civil case filed against him by 29 patients who allege he sexually abused them.
Multnomah County Circuit Judge Melvin Oden-Orr noted in his ruling Monday that “for some plaintiffs, 17 years have already passed,” The Oregonian/OregonLive reported.
Four women filed a lawsuit against West Linn Dr. David Farley and then another 25 women joined it last week. Together, the 29 women seek a total of $290 million in damages, alleging Farley performed unnecessary pelvic exams and engaged in sexual battery while they were in his care.
Judge: Suit filed by 29 women can proceed against former Portland doctor By Associated Press
Share:
PORTLAND A judge has denied a request by a former suburban Portland doctor to put a two-year hold on a civil case filed against him by 29 patients who allege he sexually abused them.
Multnomah County Circuit Judge Melvin Oden-Orr noted in his ruling Monday that “for some plaintiffs, 17 years have already passed,” The Oregonian/OregonLive reported.
Four women filed a lawsuit against West Linn Dr. David Farley and then another 25 women joined it last week. Together, the 29 women seek a total of $290 million in damages, alleging Farley performed unnecessary pelvic exams and engaged in sexual battery while they were in his care.
Lawsuit filed by 29 women can proceed against former West Linn doctor while criminal investigation continues, judge rules
Updated Dec 15, 2020;
Posted Dec 15, 2020
Former West Linn Dr. David B. Farley can still protect himself by asserting his Fifth Amendment right when necessary, the judge wrote.Getty Images
Facebook Share
A judge has denied a request by former West Linn Dr. David Farley to put a two-year hold on a civil case filed against him by 29 patients who allege he sexually abused them.
Multnomah County Circuit Judge Melvin Oden-Orr noted in his ruling Monday that “for some plaintiffs, 17 years have already passed. This consideration weighs heavily against granting the stay.”