Case law

Slovanian Literary & Social Ass'n v. City of Portland

111 Or. 335 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1924

This is *350 clearly shown by the masterful argument of Webster in page 572: • “That all property, of which the use may be beneficial to the public, belongs, therefore, to the public, is quite a new doctrine. … The council is not authorized to discriminate between applicants who *354 qualify under the terms of the ordinance. The case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356 ( 30 L. Ed. 220 , 6 Sup. Ct.

Inkley v. Forest Fiber Products Co.

288 Or. 337 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1980

It stated: "* * * Any other interpretation would have to be based on the conclusion that the legislature intended to deny a [worker] with an occupational disease claim *348 the right clearly granted to a [worker] with an … It also puts the burden on the party best able to come forward with evidence to establish prejudice.

State v. Gourley

209 Or. 363 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1956

Since we are concerned with an “operating area”, a duty was clearly imposed upon “owner, operator and person in possession.” This includes both defendants. … until the evidence had piled up sufficiently to establish the failure of defendants to do their duty and while the fire burned uncontrolled.

Noteboom v. Savin

213 Or. 583 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1958

Counsel for the defendant interposed: "Your Honor, I am going to object, first, because I feel that this is a matter, unless he is going to qualify it to show what the type of subject matter is, otherwise this witness can … Other assignments of error are so clearly lacking in merit that they do not call for discussion. The judgment is affirmed.

Dep't of Human Servs. v. A. B. (In Re J. B.)

362 Or. 412 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 8, 2018

With a founded child neglect disposi- tion, she is no longer qualified for that position. 5.  … If the law clearly lim- ited mother’s options for paid or volunteer work, we would be persuaded of the judgment’s continuing practical effects.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Sanai

360 Or. 497 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 27, 2016

Clearly, no other sanction the Court might impose, except for dismissal itself, would be effective in remedying this misconduct.” … established by other evidence that it rendered any supposed error harmless.

State v. Wallace

170 Or. 60 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1942

The foregoing is a mere review of well-established rules. … It clearly applies to cases in which the defendant purposes to show insanity as a defense (with us an affirmative defense).

State v. Simons

193 Or. 274 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 28, 1951

That case was a civil suit for a declaratory judgment to determine the extent of the liability of the plaintiff under a bond executed by it to qualify it as a broker of securities. … It was held that both defenses were immaterial, and that evidence thereof was clearly inadmissible. See also 47 Am Jur, Securities Acts, § 59, note 12.

City of Portland v. Stevens

180 Or. 514 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1946

The validity of those “charter ordinances” which related to matters purely of an intramural sort had already been established before the Boalt case was decided. Robertson v. … Baumgarten is and at all times mentioned herein was a dulv qualified and appointed police officer of the City of Portland ; “That while patrolling S. W. 1st Avenue at about 12:15 P.

Troutman v. Erlandson

279 Or. 595 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1977

This result is also consistent with the established rule in appeals from the denial of motions for mistrial based upon alleged improper arguments or other statements by counsel in jury cases. … except where they are permitted to travel out of the record, or to persist in disregarding the admonitions of the trial judge, or to indulge in remarks of a material character so grossly unwarranted and improper as to be clearly

Rankin v. Buckman

9 Or. 253 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1881

The complaint alleges substantially, that the defendants were officers of the municipal corporation of the city of East Portland, duly elected and qualified as such, and constituting what is called the Board of Trustees of … The case becomes clearer, when the duty of keeping the streets in repair is clearly implied by the charter, and adequate means provided for its performance.

Mills v. Brown

303 Or. 223 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1987

But the language of the statute does not clearly require inclusion of all parties originally named as defendants, whether or not they are parties to the litigation at the time the *228 case is submitted to the court or jury … We conclude that anyone who settles with the plaintiff under a covenant not to sue does not qualify “as a person against whom recovery is sought” as described in ORS 18.470 nor as a “party” mentioned in ORS 18.480.

Phillips v. Colfax Company, Inc.

195 Or. 285 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1952

In the Colfax Company Carl became the owner of 75 shares of capital stock, his brother Albert 74 shares and their attorney one qualifying share. … The corporate structure thus established was a necessary preliminary to securing a F. H.

Webb v. Clatsop County School District No. 3

188 Or. 324 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1950

The complaint clearly shows that the plaintiffs were seeking relief under the declaratory judgments act, and concludes with an appropriate prayer in that regard. … The persons referred to were not in any manner identified in the pleading as qualified voters of the precinct. Section 111-910, O. C. L. A., (since repealed by chapter 329, L. 1949).

State v. Clark

99 Or. 629 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1921

This instruction clearly stated the law. … The writer has seldom seen or had occasion to review a case more clearly presented or more ably and skillfully defended.

National Surety Corp. v. Smith

168 Or. 265 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1941

Clearly, the statute is applicable as a bar in all cases where the statutory period has run; provided the case does not fall within one of the three exceptions enumerated in the statute and the defense has been neither waived … They have been held immune to the same extent as are judgments and decrees in all other types of judicial proceedings.

State v. Poole

161 Or. 481 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1939

L. 978, as follows: “The general rule is that a declaration sought to be proved must have been contemporaneous with the event established as the principal act.” … Therefore, there is nothing before this court to consider at this time, but if the objection had been properly made the evidence was clearly admissible.

DeFazio v. Washington Public Power Supply System

296 Or. 550 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1984

Given the TPFA, this second act clearly is supplemental, not exclusive, authority. … Except as provided in ORS 261.380, no revenue or general obligation bonds shall be issued or sold without the approval of the qualified voters.

State v. Uroza-Zuniga

364 Or. 682 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 18, 2019

Defendant argues that ORS 430.402(1)(b) is best read to establish a broad prohibition on local laws penalizing "public drinking." … We do not mean to suggest that those are the only features a ban must have in order to qualify as general.

State v. Rafeh

361 Or. 423 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 4, 2017

Held: (1) to qualify as a testimonial statement under the federal Confrontation Clause, the statement must be made with the primary purpose of creating evidence for a criminal pros- ecution; (2) the primary purpose of the … Rather, it concluded that the child’s state- ments were not testimonial because they “clearly were not made with the primary purpose of creating evidence for [the defendant’s] prosecution.” Id.