Case law

Hermann v. Clark

108 Or. 457 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1923

In this case, the complaint avers that the defendant agreed in writing on behalf of and as agent of said owners of said property, clearly indicating that the contract was made as by an agent in the name of a principal, avowedly … Here, however, the terms of the contract calling for a net price, qualifies the implied warranty mentioned to the extent that at least so far as the encumbi*ances known to the plaintiff here are concerned, they are not to

JARVIS ET UX v. Indemnity Ins. Co.

227 Or. 508 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 12, 1961

The pleadings clearly took the case out of the coverage of the defendant's insurance policy. 9. … The nature of the connection which a person must have with a party to the prior action before he qualifies as his privy is not entirely clear.

Manke v. Nehalem Logging Co.

211 Or. 211 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 11, 1956

age and over 14 shall be employed in various lines of industry including manufacturing establishments, “* * * unless there is first produced and placed on file in such establishments * * * an age and school certificate, … I am not unmindful that some of the states from whence the foregoing citations come have since amended their respective Workmen’s Compensation Laws to give a qualified protection to some minors.

State v. Wagner

309 Or. 5 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1990

The term "this section" clearly does not refer to subsection (1)(e), which does not otherwise describe the issues or deal with their submission. … ORS 163.150(1)(d). [3] Article I, sections 20 and 21, of the Oregon Constitution provide: "Section 20. * * * No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same

State v. Roberti

298 Or. 412 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 28, 1984

. * * * The test of an opinion that purports to elucidate the rule is how clearly it tells the police under what circumstances to warn such a person before questioning. … Although the setting of the stop may be no more intrinsically coercive, it seems that the Court's qualifying words "ordinary," "typical," and "routine" exclude such stops and limit the Berkemer holding to the enforcement

Fisher Broadcasting, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

321 Or. 341 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1995

Nothing in ORS 314.670 or the rules adopted thereunder shall preclude the Department from establishing appropriate procedures under ORS 314.655 to ORS 314.665 or under ORS 314.280 for determining the apportionment factors … :¡: *357 “The manner in which the interpretation urged by the [taxpayer] would do violence to the measuring stick set forth in the act may be more clearly seen if one takes as an example a corporation whose Oregon business

State v. Boloff

138 Or. 568 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1931

A reference to the acts and conduct which it prohibits will bring to mind more clearly the issues awaiting our attention. … There is no constitutional immunity for such conduct abhorrent to our institutions." From People v.

M. K. F. v. Miramontes

352 Or. 401 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 20, 2012

The Court of Appeals in Voth held that there was no right to a jury trial in a tort action brought by an inmate against the state because, at common law, the state would have been immune from such claims entirely. … It would make no difference if the equitable cause clearly outweighed the legal cause so that the basic issue of the case taken as a whole is equitable.

Lee v. Albro

91 Or. 211 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1919

court of Multnomah County, State of Oregon, on March 25, 1893, and duly recorded; that all of the persons named in the will and codicil as trustees of the trust therein created duly accepted the office of trustee and duly qualified … With this class of business established the economic depreciation, which is well under way now, will become even more *219 rapid; the property will not warrant additional expenditure for new buildings as it will not attract

Washington Investment Ass'n v. Stanley

38 Or. 319 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 7, 1901

No objections having been urged to the competency or relevancy of the certificate, -we are of the opinion that it is adequate to1 establish, prima facie at least, the authority of the plaintiff to do business here. … All this, notwithstanding the mortgage stipulation to the effect that it is a Washington contract, clearly shows its Oregon nativity, and it is therefore solvable by the laws thereof: Meroney v. Atlanta B. & L.

Moore Mill & Lumber Co. v. Foster

216 Or. 204 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1959

Upon cross examination Valentine answered that he was not qualified to determine whether the center of section 26 was “the focal point” of the haul for the entire 100,000,000 feet. … In the absence of any evidence whatever showing that the county would improve the Sixes River road or authorize a user to do so, the rulings which sustained the plaintiff’s objections to Gibson’s testimony were clearly justified

Paullus v. YARBROUGH ET UX

219 Or. 611 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1959

This is most clearly stated in the opinion of Ritchie, E. … No doubt timber that does not qualify under that section as personal property is to be classed as real property.

Miles v. Veatch

189 Or. 506 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1950

They have, moreover, established excellent reputations as drag seine fishermen, and their catch is in demand in the fish markets. Their ages run from 25 to 60 years and over. … The ballot title and the measure itself so clearly informed the voters of the nature and description of the proposed act, that the nonobservance of the statutory requirement as to the ballot heading by some of the county

Holden v. PIONEER BROADCASTING CO.

228 Or. 405 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1961

Ask any advertiser who spends $10 a year or $10,000,000 establishing the reputation of his product or service. … Equality of privileges and immunities of citizens.

State Ex Rel. Emerald People's Utility District v. Joseph

292 Or. 357 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1982

Defendant also argues that legislation to expedite some cases over others may create "privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens," Oregon Constitution, Art I, § 20, or … The principle of separation of powers is well established. It exists under the constitution of the United States and under the constitution of each of the 50 states.

Bowles v. Barde Steel Co.

177 Or. 421 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 19, 1945

Clearly the ordinary jurisdiction of the circuit court of Oregon is adequate for the trial of the cases at bar. … Clearly the state court had jurisdiction in all five cases.

Neumann v. Liles

Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 2016

Independent News, 298 Or 434, 437, 693 P2d 35, cert den, 474 US 826 (1985) (under qualified privilege of “fair comment and criticism,” a defendant is not liable if publication was made in good faith and without malice); Peck … Although the general tenor of the review reveals its hyperbolic nature more clearly than do the individual statements contained therein, several state- ments can be characterized as hyperbolic.

Hough v. Porter

51 Or. 318 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1909

This want of substantial interference, however, was clearly established by proof to the effect that theré was no material shortage of water among those below, prior to 1895. … established.

Pacificorp Power Marketing, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

340 Or. 204 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 16, 2006

Those provisions establish that any property (including most types of intangible property) that a company uses in the performance or maintenance of an electricity business or in the sale of electricity is assessable. … The central assessment statutes clearly differentiate *217 between property that is “used” and property that is “held by a company as owner, occupant, lessee, or otherwise,” ORS 308.510(1) (2001).

Walker v. Oregon Travel Information Council

367 Or. 761 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 8, 2021

Plaintiff alleged that her memorandum to Jordan qualified as protected whistleblowing. … See, e.g., Nees, 272 Or at 219 (examining Oregon constitutional provisions and statutes and announcing that “actions by the people, the legislature, and the courts clearly indicate that the jury system and jury duty are regarded