Case law

State v. Ellison

301 Or. 676 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1986

Earlier, State v. … The two acts did not occur simultaneously, like those in State v. Brown; defendant had been stopped and was no longer driving when he gave the false name.

Lechleidner v. Carson

156 Or. 636 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1937

As said in Garnsey v. … See also Farrow v. Nevin, 44 Or. 496, 500 ( 75 P. 711 ). Again, as said in French v.

State Accident Insurance Fund Corp. v. Maddox

295 Or. 448 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 2, 1983

“February 19,1980: Court of Appeals affirms (without opinion) the Board’s order in compensability case. Maddox v. SAIF, 44 Or App 520 , 605 P2d 1391 (1980). … “March 9,1981: Court of Appeals remands compensability case to Board. Maddox v. SAIF, 51 Or App 2 , 624 P2d 643 (1981). *451 “December 7,1981: Board on remand holds claim not compensable.

M&S Market, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

344 Or. 393 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2008

He reiterated that taxpayer had never bought tobacco products from Lil Brown Smoke Shack and had no record of issuing any payments or credits to Lil Brown Smoke Shack. … See Pilgrim Turkey Packers v.

Case v. Chambers

210 Or. 680 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1957

Justice Brown’s specially concurring opinion in Smith Securities Co. v. Multnomah County, 98 Or 418, 427-431 , 192 P 654 , 194 P 428 , with Appeal of Kliks, 158 Or 669, 686 , 76 P2d 974 , and Tax Com *696 mission v. … Off v. Morehead, 235 *700 Ill 40, 85 NE 264 ; Frederick v. Dettary, 318 Mich 252 , 28 NW2d 94 ; Swift v. Tempelos, 178 NC 487, 101 SE 8 ; Axtell v. Word (Tex Civ App) 29 SW2d 421 ; Tomforde v.

Dunn v. University of Oregon

9 Or. 357 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1881

(Angell and Ames on Corporations, section 76; Thomas v. … Osborn v. The Bank of the United States, 9 Wheat., 738 ; Michigan State Bank v. Hastings, 1 Douglas, [Mich. R.,] 225; Garr v. Bright, 1 Paige Ch., 157 .)

Westfall v. Westfall

100 Or. 224 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1921

BROWN, J. We have set down the facts at some length in the statement for the reason that this case is out of the ordinary. The contradictory statements of plaintiff and defendant raise questions of veracity. … Eq. 412 ( 2 Atl. 376 ); States v. States, 37 N. J. Eq. 195; Foss v. Foss, 12 Allen, 26 ; Crehore v. Crehore, 97 Mass. 330 ( 93 Am. Dec. 98 ); Carris v. Carris, 24 N. J. Eq. 516.”

Nicklaus v. Goodspeed

56 Or. 184 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1910

There is no power granted to the district boundary board to abolish or destroy a district, and where such power is not granted it does not exist. School District v. Palmer, 41 Or. 485 ( 69 Pac. 453 .) … Taylor v. Robertson, 16 Utah, 330 ( 52 Pac. 1 .)

Partlow v. Clark

295 Or. 778 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1983

Temple v. Osburn, supra, was a suit to remove a cloud on 163 acres in Lane County. On January 19,1905, the patent from the United States Government to Texana Brown conveying that land was recorded in the deed records. … Texana Brown was the former wife of S. W. Brown, one of the defendants. On October 7,1905, Texana Brown for a valuable consideration conveyed the land to Minnie B. Temple, the plaintiff.

Beaudry v. Winchester Plywood Company

255 Or. 503 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 13, 1970

Co. v. Cooper, 3 Storey 168 , 53 Del 168, 166 A2d 723 (1960); Giambattista v. Thomas A. Edison, 32 NJ Super 103, 107 A2d 801 (1954); and National Zinc Company v. Hainline, 360 P2d 236 (Okla 1961). … See Matter of Detenbeck v. General Motors Corp., 309 NY 558 , 132 NE2d 840 (1956); Matter of Dorman v. New York State Dept. of Public Works, 22 App Div 2d 725, 253 NYS2d 243 (1964); and Matter of Conroy v.

Oregon Coal Co. v. Coos Co.

30 Or. 308 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1897

In *310 Smith v. … v.

Niccum v. Southcoast Lumber Co.

320 Or. 189 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 29, 1994

On judicial review, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the Board is authorized to resolve a claim for proposed medical treatment and remanded the case for reconsideration. Niccum v. … This court held in Martin v. City of Albany, 320 Or 175 , 880 P2d 926 (1994), that ORS 656.327(l)(a) does not authorize the director to review a dispute over proposed medical treatment.

Splonskofsky v. Minto

62 Or. 560 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 13, 1912

In Hamilton v. … People, 75 Ill. 561 ; Munson v. Miner, 22 Ill. 594 ; Samuels v. Drainage Com’n, 125 Ill. 536 ( 17 N. E. 829 ) ; People v. Knopf, 183 Ill. 410 ( 56 N. E. 155 ) ; Rosell v. Board of Education, 68 N. J.

State v. Hall

73 Or. 231 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1914

, as was the the case in Riggs v. … Henry, 54 Or. 230 ( 103 Pac. 439 ); State v. Sengstacken, 61 Or. 455 ( 122 Pac. 292 ); Sharp v. George, 5 Ariz. 65 ( 46 Pac. 212 ); People v. Union High School District, 101 Cal. 655 ( 36 Pac. 119 ).

Terry v. Title & Trust Co.

207 Or. 356 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1956

Brown is insolvent. … See opinion in the case of Gower v. State Tax Commission, this day written. Reversed.

Venable v. Police Commissioners

40 Or. 458 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1902

E. 975 ); Langdon v. Mayor of New York, 92 N. Y. 427 ; People ex rel. v. Board of Fire Com’rs, 72 N. Y. 445 ; Moores v. State ex rel. 54 Neb. 486 ( 74 N. W. 823 ). 3. … We quote the language of the cases: ££ The power to appoint to office or place where the term and tenure are not defined necessarily carries with it the power of removal”: People ex rel. v. Board of Fire Com’rs, 73 N.

SAIF Corp. v. Sprague

346 Or. 661 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 27, 2009

Sprague v. … SAIF v. Sprague, 221 Or App 413 , 190 P3d 443 (2008) (Sprague III). The majority concluded that the board had complied with the remand instructions and affirmed the board’s decision.

State v. Fogle

254 Or. 268 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1969

Jones v. *275 City of Forrest City, 239 Ark 211 , 388 SW2d 386 (1965); State v. Fox, 177 Neb 238, 128 NW2d 576 (1964); and State v. … In Kyhl v.

Roberts v. TriQuint Semiconductor, Inc.

358 Or. 413 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 10, 2015

CTS Corp. v. … Ross v.

Kroner v. City of Portland

116 Or. 141 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 14, 1925

Residen *148 tial District: For single and two family dwellings, fiats, apartment houses, boarding-houses, hotels, multiple dwellings and the like. Class II. … Bean, Brown, Coshow and Belt, JJ., concur.