Case law

Blue v. City of Union

159 Or. 5 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1938

negatived, or the *17 exemption clearly stated. — 2 Dillon, Mun. … Influenced by such promptings, the party may forego rights which he could readily establish in litigation, but he surrenders them for the sake of peace.

Hillman v. Northern Wasco County PUD

213 Or. 264 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1958

But the constitution does not sanction the delegation of a legislative power to any private agency no matter how well qualified such agency may be. … We will first consider the question of governmental immunity.

Giesy v. Marion County

91 Or. 450 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1919

In the ordinary course of procedure in such matteifs, it might often happen that a person who is not a qualified petitioner for a county road would sign such a petition. … The established practice under the statute should not be chahged except by the clearly expressed will of the lawmakers. The law of 1913 was repealed by the Laws of 1917, page 588. 7.

Peninsula Drainage District No. 2 v. City of Portland

212 Or. 398 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1958

Where then would there be sovereign immunity? In Lee v. … Aho that “This decision [the Bishop case] sufficiently establishes the proposition that this ‘tax’ can be levied * * * upon real property which has come into possession of the United States.” Ford v.

Kramer v. City of Lake Oswego

365 Or. 422 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 1, 2019

Lash, The Origins of the Privileges or Immunities Clause, Part I: "Privileges and Immunities" as an Antebellum Term of Art, 98 Geo. L.J. 1241 , 1253, 1260-61 (2010) ). … that the immunity belonged equally to all who satisfied the terms "debtors and sailors," even though the immunity was not equally available to those who were only "debtors."

Megdal v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners

288 Or. 293 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1980

Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals was troubled by the problem posed by forbidding a skilled or professional person, once found qualified, to practice his or her occupation on essentially ad hoc determinations of "unprofessional … The use of the word "means” clearly was designed to limit "unprofessional conduct” to the specified acts.

State v. Kelley

118 Or. 397 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 3, 1926

His waiver is not partial; having once cast aside the cloak of immunity, he may not resume it at will, whenever cross-examination may be inconvenient or embarrassing.” … In the twenty-seventh assignment the defendants complain about the court not giving the following direction to the jury: “The right to qualify a verdict of murder in the first degree or guilty of murder in the first degree

Senn v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

305 Or. 256 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1988

such immunizations.” … Wyeth Laboratories, Inc., Nos. 52108, 52564 (Ohio Ct App, July 30, 1987) (LEXIS, States library, Ohio file) (DPT vaccine qualifies for comment k protection).

State v. Ciancanelli

339 Or. 282 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 29, 2005

In fact, the words are so clear and sweeping that we think that we would not be keeping faith with the framers who wrote them if we were to qualify or water them down, unless the historical record demonstrated clearly that … Clearly, it can do so only if it demonstrates that Robertson is incompatible with both of the possible meanings of that provision that we have identified.

Nakashima v. Oregon State Board of Education

344 Or. 497 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 8, 2008

OSAA indicated that if PAA refused to play a Saturday game for which it qualified, PAA would have to forfeit the game. … The basketball tournament in which petitioners will play, if they qualify, will be in Salem, not Pendleton.

Booth v. Tektronix, Inc.

312 Or. 463 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1991

Those statutory provisions are prefaced by the qualifying phrase that ‘ ‘ [s]uch rules shall include, but not necessarily be limited to [items specified in (l)(a)-(e)].” … reliance) that the rule would not provide the physician immunity for participating in ex parte contact.

Schafroth v. Baker

276 Or. 39 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1976

The protection of qualified privilege may be lost in a number of ways. … Although the occasion was clearly privileged, as disclosed by the allegations and admissions in the pleadings, the jury’s verdict demonstrates that the defense of privilege was rejected.

Amfac Foods, Inc. v. International Systems & Controls Corp.

294 Or. 94 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1982

We should add that proof of the control actually exercised may, in some cases, suffice to establish an agency relationship. … The evidence was clearly relevant, both to explain the meaning of a colloquial term having a unique significance in the industry, and to rebut Key’s testimony. On remand, the evidence should be received.

Committee in Opposition to the Prison v. Oregon Emergency Corrections Facility Siting Authority

309 Or. 678 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 26, 1990

The Act established the process that led to the selection of the subject site. … Equal Privileges and Immunities and Equal Protection Petitioners’ equal privileges and immunities and equal protection arguments also lack merit.

Pocholec v. GIUSTINA

224 Or. 245 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 12, 1960

It is for the jury to decide whether the landowner has met the minimum standard of care required for immunity from liability. … Clearly, the witness Taylor, who was salesman for a fence company, was not qualified to testify as to the feasibility of operating a log pond encircled by a fence.

Crawford v. School District No. 7

68 Or. 388 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1913

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor … A. 830), the syllabus of the case is as follows: “Until the legislature clearly confers power upon boards of education of cities of the second class to establish separate schools for the education of white and colored children

State v. Savage

96 Or. 53 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1919

state Constitutions which prohibit the enactment of special laws -granting privileges and immunities. … Sturgess, 9 Or. 537, 539 , this court recognized the validity of a local act of October 16, 1878, establishing “such regulations for the protection of salmon in the particular locality embraced by it, as the legislature deemed

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Carpenter

250 Or. 394 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1968

The preparation of a false document, and the threat of criminal prosecution to enforce a claim are acts which clearly violate the ethical code of the legal profession. … Similarly the threat of criminal prosecution to enforce a claim is contrary to the accepted precepts of “fair play” and is clearly proscribed by the lawyer’s code of ethics.

City of Portland v. Holmes

232 Or. 505 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1962

rule reflected by the cases cited by the defendant continued to prevail as to all governmental agencies until 1931 when it was relaxed by the legislature as to cities in proceedings for the condemnation of property for the establishment … Burnett[’s]” was certainly unfortunate and clearly inadmissible.

Hanns v. Friedly

181 Or. 631 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1947

Counsel for defendant then objected to the question, on the ground that the witness was not qualified. The court ruled that, as owner of the property, she was qualified. … In onr view she was qualified to express an opinion as to its value.