Case law

Compensation of Harris v. SAIF Corp.

292 Or. 683 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1982

See Gettman v. SAIF, 289 Or 609, 614 , 616 P2d 473 (1980); Bentley v. SAIF, supra, 38 Or App at 478 ; 3 Larson, supra at §§ 81.20-81.33. … See also Hoffmeister v. State Indus. Acc.

Hofer v. Carson

102 Or. 545 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1922

Wakefield, 133 Mass. 240 ; Julienne v. Jackson, 69 Miss. 34 ( 10 South. 43 , 30 Am. St. Rep. 526 ); Morey v. Brown, 42 N. H. 373; Fox v. Mohawk & H. River Humeme Soc., 165 N. Y. 517 ( 59 N. E. 353 , 80 Am. St. … Rep. 459 ), the legislation was upheld as an exercise of the police power as distinguished from the taxing power and in Cooley v. Board of Wardens, 12 How. 299 ( 13 L.

School District v. Palmer

41 Or. 485 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1902

court, or the board of commissioners in counties where this board is a separate body, shall constitute a board for laying off his county in convenient school districts, such board to be styled the District Boundary Board … W. 871 ); State v. Partlow, 91 N. C. 550 ( 49 Am. Rep. 652 ); Ward v. Ward, 37 Tex. 389 .

Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc.

312 Or. 376 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1991

See State v. Brown, supra, 310 Or at 355-56 (applying this method). This is not a requirement of mere form. … State v. Brown, 310 Or 347, 355-56 , 800 P2d 259 (1990); State v. Avent, 209 Or 181, 183 , 302 P2d 549 (1956).

SAIF Corp. v. Kurcin

334 Or. 399 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2002

SAIF v. Kurcin, 160 Or App 489, 494 , 981 P2d 1277 (1999). We allowed claimant’s petition for review. We reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals and affirm the Board’s order. … The Court of Appeals concluded that “[w]hether to grant a continuance is a matter committed to the discretion of the Board.” SAIF v. Kurcin, 160 Or App at 492 .

Harwell v. Argonaut Insurance

296 Or. 505 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1984

We allowed review because the “Court of Appeals may have affirmed the Board as the result of an erroneous interpretation of the law.” Gettman v. … On the other hand, the referee, the Board, or the Court of Appeals could not be faulted if they read our cases of Walker v. Compensation Department, supra, and Wilson v. State Ind. Acc.

State Treasurer v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

353 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 13, 2012

Mills v. … Then- 5 Senator Kate Brown introduced SB 609 in the 2003 legislative session.

Schleiss v. SAIF Corp.

354 Or. 637 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2013

Smothers v. … Barrett v.

Crawford v. School District No. 7

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

In the case of Board of Education v. … In People v. Board of Education, 18 Mich. 409 , Mr.

SAIF Corp. v. Shipley

326 Or. 557 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1998

Newspaper Pub. v. … Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or 376, 383 , 823 P2d 956 (1991). The parties may not waive lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Wink v.

Moulton v. Logan

157 Or. 406 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 23, 1937

Ed. 402 ); Miles v. Logan, (Tex. Civ. App.) 265 S. W. 421 ; Flemming v. Stahl, 83 Fed. 940 ; Sharpe v. Los Angeles, 136 Cal. App. 732 ( 29 P. (2d) 797 ); Morgan v. Nunn, 84 Fed. 551 ; 14 R. C. L. 374, § 76; 46 C. … There are possibly exceptional cases, as observed by Circuit Judge (afterwards supreme court justice) Lurton in Morgan v.

Walker v. Oregon Travel Information Council

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

In Brown v. … Brown v. J. C. Penney Co., 297 Or 695, 705, 688 P2d 811 (1984) (emphasis added).

Monroe v. Withycombe

84 Or. 328 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1917

Cas. 1912B, 65); State v. Leavitt, 105 Me. 76 ( 72 Atl. 875 , 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 799); Phipps v. State, 22 Md. 380 ( 85 Am. Dec. 654 ); Commonwealth v. Hilton, 174 Mass. 29 ( 54 N. E. 362 , 45 L. R. A. 475); Heckman v. … L., pp. 176, 179; and likewise the legislature may delegate to a board the power to stock a stream and close it against fishing, provided the order is not discriminatory: Portland Fish Co. v.

Department of Consumer & Business Services v. Muliro

359 Or. 736 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2016

The order of the board is reversed, and the case is remanded to the board for further proceedings. 738 DCBS v. Muliro NAKAMOTO, J. … As support, the board cited three Court of Appeals cases “dealing with ‘imputation’ between an employer and its insurer”: Anfilofieff v. SAIF, 52 Or App 127, 627 P2d 1274 (1981); Nix v.

City of Portland v. GARNER

226 Or. 80 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1960

Winslow v. … Bechtold v. Wilson, 182 Or 360, 377 , 186 P2d 525 , 187 P2d 675 ; Safeway Stores v. State Board of Agriculture, 198 Or 43, 53 , 255 P2d 564 .

Reynolds Metals Co. v. State Tax Commission

227 Or. 467 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1961

Robinson et ux v. State Tax Com., 216 Or 532 , 339 P2d 432 ; Case v. Chambers et al., 210 Or 680 , 314 P2d 256 ; Tax Com. v. … However, as we observed in M & M Woodworking Co. v. Tax Com., 217 Or 161, 190 , 314 P2d 272 , 314 P2d 275 , 317 P2d 920 , 317 P2d 925 , 339 P2d 718 , and in Case v.

In Re Complaint as to Conduct of Huffman

328 Or. 567 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 27, 1999

Huffman v. Leon De Mendoza, 135 Or App 680, 686 , 899 P2d 734 (1995), rev den 322 Or 489 (1996). … However, as this court noted in State v.

Girod v. Kroger

351 Or. 389 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2011

Brown, Portland, filed the petition and reply memorandum for petitioner Johnson. Hobart B. Kytr, pro se, filed the petition and reply memorandum for himself. Thomas V. … As part of the U.S. v.

State v. Standard Oil Co.

61 Or. 438 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1912

The rule is stated in the late case of Brown-Forman Co. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 217 U. S. 563 , at page 575 (30 Sup. Ct. 578, at page 580: 54 L. … .” — citing Brown v. Huston, 114 U. S. 622 (5 Sup. Ct. 1091: 29 L. Ed. 257 ) ; Machine Co. v. Gage, 100 U. S. 676 ( 25 L. Ed. 754 ).

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Geurts

290 Or. 241 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1980

It is enough if the Board of Governors takes responsibility for the composition of a trial board in *245 fact and not only in law, that is to say, if the proposed membership is reported to the Board of Governors and the board … U S Const, amend V: "No person shall ... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, . . .” 8 Cf. Megdal v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners, 288 Or 293 , 605 P2d 273 (1980).