Case law

Wasiljeff v. Hawley Paper Co.

68 Or. 487 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1914

It is clearly shown that the plaintiff was ordered by the foreman to climb the ladder and throw off the belt; that he obeyed the order and ascended the ladder, and, in throwing off the belt from a revolving pulley, his right … necessary to decide whether it requires an expert to testify as to how the defendant could have arranged his machinery so that it would have been safe to his employees. ' It may be that this witness was an expert and fully qualified

In re Graeff

368 Or. 18 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2021

The Bar must establish mis- conduct by clear and convincing evidence, BR 5.2, which is “evidence establishing that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable,” In re Kirchoff, 361 Or 712, 714, 399 P3d 453 (2017) ( … However, the Bar does not argue that the record establishes that respondent committed that crime.

Lake Oswego Preservation Society v. City of Lake Oswego

Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 2016

Thus, although “[t]he legislature knows how to include qualifying language in a statute when it wants to do so,” PGE v. … First, the owner must establish that it was the owner of the property at the time that it was designated. Second, it must establish that the designation was “imposed” on the property by the local government.

Ollis v. Department of Revenue

303 Or. 75 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1987

“Any one or more of the three approaches to value may finally be used, except [not applicable].” 2 *79 In the Tax Court three witnesses qualified as experts and each gave a different opinion of the true cash value of the … He then used standard cost factors to establish a per space gross cost for the improvements on the 84 spaces.

In Re Marriage of Weber

337 Or. 55 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 27, 2004

In the context of the parties' respective economic circumstances, a jump in husband's income of the magnitude shown here in only two years easily qualifies, in the words of ORS 107.135(3)(a), as a substantial change in husband's … Additionally, the statute clearly calls for the application of the "substantial change" standard to the economic circumstances of either party.

State v. Nelson

162 Or. 430 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1939

The court may appoint one or more disinterested qualified experts to examine the defendant with regard to his present mental condition and to testify at the hearing. … The rule is well established under the statutes of other states providing for such preliminary examinations and hearings, as shown by the authorities first cited.

Dept. of Human Services v. F. J. M.

370 Or. 434 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2022

Father contends that the psychological evaluation that the juvenile court ordered does not qualify as “treatment” and that, even if it does, it was not “needed” by father. … The juvenile court continued the children’s placement in substitute care and established a case plan of reunification with a concurrent plan of adoption.

Bennett v. Pratt

228 Or. 474 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1961

Neill, supra. • • We accept- the rule substantially as stated in the cases cited, qualifying it.only by. giving approval also *479 to West v. … before October 15 Would be impossible; Amos Bennett also testified that defendant told him that Louden had said “he would back Paul on the plants, money to take care of the crops and so on, # * f” We find that the evidence clearly

Gilbertson v. Culinary Alliance & Bartenders' Union

204 Or. 326 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1955

“An author must be supposed to be consistent with himself; and, therefore, if in one *339 place he has expressed his mind clearly, it ought to be presumed that he is still of the same mind in another place, unless it clearly … In answer to the claim that the union’s conduct was protected as the exercise of the right of free speech, the court said: “It rarely has been suggested that the constitutional freedom for speech and press extends its immunity

Gibbs v. First National Insurance Co. of America

151 Or. 241 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1935

These prices were established by a printed advertisement published by the manufacturer thereof, which recited that the price to the dealer was $87.48 and that the price to be charged by the dealer upon making a sale thereof … Clearly, the jury could not have understood the court to mean that the words “any defect in any proof of loss” had any reference to any fraudulent representation contained in the proof of *248 loss.

Lipscomb v. State Bd. of Higher Ed.

305 Or. 472 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1988

Paulus, 297 Or 646 , 688 P2d 367 (1984) (reviewing method of qualifying signatures on initiative petitions). … The lead paragraph is clearly in error; that veto power had been enjoyed by the Governor since a 1916 constitutional amendment.

Marshall v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP

Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 28, 2023

When viewed as a list, the word “property” follows the word “person” within the stat- ute, a clearly tangible term. … by law, including but not limited to the limitations established by ORS 12.110.”

Craswell v. Biggs

160 Or. 547 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1938

of the mere justification in order to bind the surety. *564 In the instant case the agreement declared upon by the plaintiffs was a regular agreement to .answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another and comes clearly … contract to do this work was between the plaintiffs and Biggs and Hallyburton, and before any part-performance can take the matter out of the statute of frauds, it must be shown that the oral agreement was made by a person qualified

Marshall v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP

Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 28, 2023

When viewed as a list, the word “property” follows the word “person” within the stat- ute, a clearly tangible term. … by law, including but not limited to the limitations established by ORS 12.110.”

STATE EX REL. PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. v. Duncan

191 Or. 475 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1951

The Riesland case was based upon the refusal of the county clerk of Multnomah County to approve an undertaking after the sureties had fully qualified. … duty to grant or deny an interlocutory injunction has been entrusted by the law to the judicial discretion, not of the appellate court or of any of its members,, but to the court of original jurisdiction, and, unless it clearly

In Re Moynihan

166 Or. 200 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1941

Crawford, about this particular tract of land he told me at that time, that he had the matter very clearly in mind, as he had been recently in contact with property close *204 by, and had it clearly in mind as to the location … The trial committee unanimously found that the “evidence clearly establishes that the Ostranders were not present on the occasion when the Smiths and” Mrs. Briedwell were in Mr. Moynihan’s office.

Marshall v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP

Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 28, 2023

When viewed as a list, the word “property” follows the word “person” within the stat- ute, a clearly tangible term. … by law, including but not limited to the limitations established by ORS 12.110.”

Portland General Electric Co. v. State Tax Commission

249 Or. 239 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1968

Arizona Tax Comm’n, 380 US 685 , 85 S Ct 1242 , 14 LEd2d 165 (1965), in support of its contention that its interest in both the lands of the United States and the tribal lands is immune from taxation. … The commission’s reason for increasing the value of PGE’s interest in the United States lands from $10 to $60 does not clearly appear from the record. *255 ⑭ The reason assigned for the increase by the commission is not controlling

Lehman v. Bradbury

333 Or. 231 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 11, 2002

They state: “As a matter of law, a proposal to establish qualifications for officers of state government, which is a matter clearly within the power and jurisdiction of a state, is not ‘closely related’ to a proposal to establish … Article II, section 17, for example, specifies where electors must reside to qualify to vote for members of Congress, but it is silent about what qualifications members must possess or how many terms they are entitled to

McLean v. Buck Medical Services, Inc.

334 Or. 17 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2002

Relying on the common usage of the terms "person" and "personal," plaintiff contends that term "contract for personal service" clearly pertains to contracts for the services of a particular individual. … We agree with the Court of Appeals' assessment that ambulance service qualifies as an "other human service[]."