Case law

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of White

311 Or. 573 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1991

The Bar has the burden of establishing ethical misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. BR 5.2. … The evidence does not show clearly and convincingly that the accused filed the lien merely to harass.

State v. Cortes

374 Or. 461 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2025

When defense counsel sought further clarification on Vidal’s understanding of what qualified as a “weapon,” Vidal testified that the meaning of the term depended, to some extent, on context: “[DEFENSE COUNSEL:] Okay. … This is clearly a knife. And under the, the weapons provi- sion that the Probation Officer read[,] this clearly consti- tutes a weapon.”

State v. Cortes

374 Or. 461 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2025

When defense counsel sought further clarification on Vidal’s understanding of what qualified as a “weapon,” Vidal testified that the meaning of the term depended, to some extent, on context: “[DEFENSE COUNSEL:] Okay. … This is clearly a knife. And under the, the weapons provi- sion that the Probation Officer read[,] this clearly consti- tutes a weapon.”

Wyers v. American Medical Response Northwest, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 11, 2016

In contrast to the first mental state requirement, then, the second one clearly refers to constructive awareness of a particular fact— another person’s physical or financial abuse—not awareness of the defendant’s own conduct … AMR does not dispute that each of the six plaintiffs qualified as a “vulnerable person” within the meaning of ORS 124.100(1)(e). 5  As we note later in this opinion, the evidence in the record is sufficient to permit

State v. Ogden

39 Or. 195 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1901

And, as we have seen, a witness called for the defendant in a criminal action to establish. his reputation as to any specific trait of character is required to testify on cross-examination in relation to similar specific … to testify concerning the general reputation of another witness ought to be required on cross-examination to detail with much greater particularity all the facts and circumstances that may in any manner tend to limit or qualify

Pokorny v. Williams

199 Or. 17 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1953

Netter, had the respondent sign Exhibit C shows very clearly and without any dispute that in the words of the Supreme Court of Oregon in Nugent v. … His testimony at the trial establishes a general agency. 1 Restatement, Agency, § 3.

Nelson v. Lane County

304 Or. 97 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1987

FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION Title 42 U.S.C. section 1983 prohibits state officials operating "under color of" government authority from violating any of plaintiff's "rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution … Clearly, the State has a compelling interest in controlling drunk driving.

Standard Lbr. Co. v. Pierce

112 Or. 314 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1924

Those cases abundantly establish the right of plaintiff to obtain a consideration of its alleged grievances by a court of equity. … The validity of the progressive feature of the Oregon Income Tax Act as against the objection that it *333 violates the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is clearly established by the decisions of the

State v. Sierra

361 Or. 723 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 10, 2017

In order to “assure the absence of such a motivation,” the Court articulated the fol- lowing two prophylactic rules: 4   The existence of that authority does not mean that its exercise is immune from challenge. … Here, the total length of defen- dant’s second sentence—276 months—exceeds the length of his first sentence—250 months—and therefore qualifies as a “more severe” sentence.

Hatcher v. Briggs

6 Or. 31 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1876

That tribunal proceeded in accordance with the provisions of chapter 9 of an act to establish a probate court, and define its duties, passed December 14, 1853, statutes of 1855, p. 383, and which took immediate effect. … Helm, consulting professionally with the two last named; and in his own testimony he states that he knew the character of the sale at the time he signed the receipt, qualifying that statement by saying that his knowledge

Stemmer v. Scottish Insurance

33 Or. 65 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1898

White, claiming that he was well qualified for the position, and stating that, if plaintiff did not accept White as his appraiser, they would deny all liability; and that, in view of this threat, their client, against his … But he waives his right to an appeal by accepting a benefit which is inconsistent with the claim of right he seeks to establish by the appeal.” See also 2 Beach’s Mod. Eq. § 926 and notes.

State v. Lewis

352 Or. 626 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 8, 2012

appeared 22 shocked when he saw the catering truck, which was evidence that his lack 23 of attention was protracted rather than just momentary. 24 (9) The catering truck had its turn signal on, was clearly … Cars qualify as inherently dangerous 11 weapons. State v. Hill, 298 Or 270, 277, 692 P2d 100 (1984).

Watkins v. Ackley

370 Or. 604 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 2022

analysis to determine the retro- activity of new rules of federal constitutional law in state post-conviction proceedings and denied retroactive appli- cation of any new constitutional rule of criminal procedure that did not qualify … legislature already has made that choice, by enacting a statute—the PCHA—that requires retroactive application in post-conviction of any new fed- eral constitutional rule of criminal procedure and that the Supreme Court has clearly

State v. Giron-Cortez

372 Or. 729 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2024

More is required to establish “extreme indifference to the value of human life.” … Giron-Cortez But, to whatever extent Boone must be read to compel the majority’s transformation of extreme indiffer- ence from a circumstance element to a conduct element, the footnote in Boone is clearly wrong

McGarrah v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

296 Or. 145 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1983

. “* * * Both the medical and other evidence establish that job-related stress caused claimant’s mental disorder.” Id. at 457-58 . … The court began its analysis by declaring that the Wisconsin Workers’ Compensation Act clearly did not intend to limit recovery to physical injuries and traumatically caused mental injuries.

Lilienthal v. Kaufman

239 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 30, 1964

The interests of neither jurisdiction are clearly more important than those of the other. … For the contrary view, see Currie and Schreter, Unconstitutional Discrimination in the Conflict of Laws: Privileges and Immunities, 69 Yale L J 1323 (1960).

Schmidt v. Mt. Angel Abbey

347 Or. 389 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 24, 2009

We therefore conclude that conduct qualifies as "sexual exploitation of a child" under ORS 12.117(2)(d) if an individual uses a child in a sexual way for his or her own gratification or benefit, and the child is personally … Examples serve no right or wrong purpose, and the legislature may use examples in one statute to establish limits on an ambiguous term, and in another to illustrate or expand.

Emery v. State

297 Or. 755 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 6, 1984

City of Beaverton, 294 Or. 254 , 259 n. 5, 656 P.2d 306 (1982), we qualified that statement: "* * * the criteria of compensable `taking for public use' under art I, § 18, are not necessarily identical to those pronounced … Assuming that a movant establishes a right to possession, the court may postpone execution of an order to return the property only "until such time as the things in question need no longer remain available for evidentiary

Hansen v. Bussman

274 Or. 757 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1976

In cases involving personal injuries, however, it is the rule that in order to establish the necessary causal *785 relationship it is sufficient to establish that the injurious consequences were the "probable” result of the … The letter was dated June 8, 1971 and refers, among other things, to an incident in January 1970 at which time plaintiff was seen at a county "immunization clinic,” as well as references to plaintiff’s treatment by Dr.

GTE Northwest Inc. v. Public Utility Commission

321 Or. 458 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 24, 1995

LECs provide basic telecommunications services within geographic boundaries established by the PUC. See id. at § (18) (defining LECs). … The cases cited above establish a bright-line rule: that an agency may not act in eminent domain without an express grant of power from the legislature.