Civil litigation defense attorney for Oregon churches and religious schools - Kaempf Law Firm

John Kaempf - Portland Attorney

John Kaempf

Kaempf Law Firm PC
121 S.W. Morrison Street
Suite 1100
Portland, OR 97204
Phone:
503-224-5006
Fax:
503-241-5013
Email:
john@kaempflawfirm.com

For 26 years, John Kaempf has successfully defended civil litigation in Oregon's state and federal courts. He specializes in defending lawsuits against churches and religious schools, as well as child abuse claims. He also specializes in defending high exposure personal injury cases. He has tried over 20 personal injury cases to a verdict. He has defended dozens of child sex abuse cases against churches and individuals, including some of the largest child abuse cases in the country. He is one of the few defense lawyers who has tried a civil child abuse case to a jury. The case favorably settled after two weeks of trial when the plaintiff refused to testify. He has also won many child abuse cases through summary judgment motions. He also has expertise in First Amendment free exercise of religion defenses to claims against religious entities.

Through pretrial motions, John won lawsuits filed against the Multnomah Athletic Club, Jesuit High School, Mt. Angel Abbey, the Franciscan Friars, and the Foursquare Church. Also, he won jury trials in serious personal injury cases against Pizza Hut and Burger King. Therefore, he is on the short list of Oregon civil defense trial attorneys for high exposure “bet the church” cases.

John is a Cum Laude 1992 graduate of Lewis and Clark Law School. He is a lifelong Oregonian and is recognized by his peers as one of The "Best Lawyers in America" and one of “America’s Top 100 Attorneys.” He has been honored as an Oregon "Super Lawyer" every year the award has been given. In addition, he has an AV Peer Review Rating with Martindale-Hubbell, an award that recognizes the highest level of skill and integrity. His firm is one of the “Best Law Firms in Oregon” as selected by U.S. News & World Report.

John is the author and publisher of Religious Law Update, a newsletter that addresses developments in the law that affect churches, religious schools, and other religious organizations. A link to the Religious Law Update Blog is above.

Before opening his firm in 2008, John worked for 16 years at one of Oregon's largest civil defense law firms, where he was an equity partner.

Therefore, John combines big firm experience with the responsiveness of a small firm.

Professional Recognition

  • Named one of the "Best Lawyers in America" in Civil Litigation Defense from 2011-present
  • Kaempf Law firm PC has been selected as one of “the Best Law Firms in Oregon” by U.S. News & World Report since 2014
  • Selected to "Oregon Super Lawyers" from 2006-present, every year the award has been given, which is granted to only the top 5% of attorneys
  • Awarded AV rating, the highest, by the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory
  • Given the "Lifetime Achievement Award" by “America's Top 100 Attorneys” in 2018
  • Selected as an “Allied Attorney” in 2018 by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Christian entities in both of the major religious freedom cases now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court

Representative Cases

Defending Child Abuse Claims Against Religious Entities and Individuals

The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment John obtained for his clients in J.S. v. Franciscan Friars of Oregon, 215 Or App 500 (2007), a case involving alleged child abuse by a Catholic priest. The court upheld the trial court's rulings that the defendants were not vicariously liable for the priest's alleged sexual abuse of the plaintiff, and that the statute of limitations barred the case.

In 2017, John succeeded in getting the plaintiff to drop his multi-million dollar child sex abuse lawsuit against a church and an order of priests without being paid any money. This occurred after an investigation revealed that plaintiff’s brothers and fellow Altar Boys said the allegations were false. The lawsuit was dismissed after John’s clients made it clear to the plaintiff and his attorney that no money would be paid. The case is Smith v. Province of The Holy Name, Multnomah County Circuit Court case number 16CV05662.

Defending Churches and Religious Schools

In 2013, John successfully defended a religious high school in a lawsuit where the plaintiffs, a former student and his parents, sued for readmission to the school and sought money damages after the school expelled the student for misconduct. The trial court granted John’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case, holding that it was (1) barred by the First Amendment's Free Exercise of Religion clause; (2) the school’s student handbook granted it the sole discretion to decide disciplinary issues that could not be challenged in court; and (3) the claimed damages were speculative and thus not recoverable.

In 2002, John won a case for a Christian school filed against it by a religion teacher it fired for admittedly having premarital sex in violation of its religious doctrine. The teacher sought instatement to her job and money damages. The court dismissed the case before trial because, as John argued, the Free Exercise of Religion clause of the First Amendment prohibits secular courts from second-guessing faith-based employment decisions.

Defending High Exposure Personal Injury Cases

In Stewart v. Kralman, 240 Or App 510 (2011), a personal injury case where the plaintiff was paralyzed while snowmobiling on the defendant’s property, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment John obtained in the trial court based on Oregon’s recreational purposes immunity statutes. In Andrews v. R.W. Hays Co., 166 Or App 494 (2000), the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment John obtained in the trial court for the defendant in a premises liability action where the plaintiff was severely injured, holding that the defendant was not negligent as a matter of law. In Walden v. Burger King Corp., Clackamas County Circuit Court case number CCV 0303675 (2003), the jury returned a defense verdict in a case where the plaintiff was critically injured on the defendant’s premises, finding that the defendant was not negligent. In Cook v. Philip Morris Inc., 44 Fed Appx 762 (9th Cir 2002), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment John obtained in the District of Oregon federal trial court based on the statute of limitations in a personal injury case where the plaintiff was blinded after a cigarette lighter exploded.

Professional Activities and Memberships

  • Legal Extern, the Honorable Otto R. Skopil, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1991
  • Oregon Association of Defense Counsel (OADC); Practice Tips Editor, OADC Magazine (2002-2008)
  • Oregon State Bar Association, Litigation Section. Multnomah Bar Association.
  • Oregon State Bar Board of Governors, Uniform Civil Jury Instructions Committee (2004-2005)
  • Oregon State Board of Bar Examiners, Summer 2000
  • In 2001, in order to help defendants facing possible liability for punitive damages in Oregon, John drafted and helped enact an amendment to Oregon Revised Statutes 31.725, which addresses claims for punitive damages. John’s amendment states that when a party moves to amend their pleading to assert a claim for punitive damages, “the court shall deny” the motion “if the party opposing the motion establishes that the timing of the motion to amend prejudices the party's ability to defend against the claim for punitive damages.” John’s amendment further states that “if the court grants the motion, the court may continue the action to allow such discovery as the defendant may require to defend against the claim for punitive damages.”

Education

Honors

Bar Admissions

  • Oregon State Bar (admitted 1992)
  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • United States District Court, District of Oregon