Case law

SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BD. v. Emerald PUD

339 Or. 631 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 2005

See PGE v. … In Wasco County P.U.D. 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.

Schleiss v. SAIF Corp.

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

Smothers v. … Barrett v.

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.

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.

Kelley v. Park View Apartments

215 Or. 198 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1958

Brown.” Mr. Brown is the husband of the defendant-appellant Myrtle Brown. Neither Cook’s apartment nor the Browns’ faces on 18th. … Ure v. United States, 93 F Supp 779 ; Brown, Adm’x. v. Gessler, 191 Or 503 , 230 P2d 541 , and Bedell et ux. v.

State v. Jackson

296 Or. 430 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1984

What I have to say hereafter about the plurality opinion in Texas v. Brown, ___ U.S. ___, 103 S.Ct. 1535 , 75 L.Ed.2d 502 (1983), is unnecessary to a decision in the case at bar. … State v. Louis, supra . [5] I take the facts from Brown v. State, Tex.Cr.

Larson v. Heintz Construction Co.

219 Or. 25 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1959

Lovett v. … S. v.

Horner's Market, Inc. v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District

256 Or. 124 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 2, 1970

This, we understand, is the import of Sailors v. Board of Education, 387 US 105 , 87 S Ct 1549 , 18 L Ed2d 650 (1967). … Plaintiffs point specifically to the elaboration of the principle in Sailors v. Board of Education, 387 US 105 , 87 S Ct 1549 , 18 L Ed 2d 650 (1967); Kramer v.

Lommasson v. School District No. 1

201 Or. 71 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1954

State v. Stout, 206 Ind 58, 187 NE 267, 269 ; McSherry v. City of St. Paul, 202 Minn 102, 277 NW 541, 546 . … Funston v. District School Board, Etc., 130 Or 82, 90 , 278 P 1075 , 63 ALR 1410 .

State ex rel. Virginia Glass Products Corp. v. Glens Falls Insurance

254 Or. 340 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1969

Dist. v. Gen. Ins. Co., 240 Or 103 , 399 P2d 351 , we pointed out that the affirmative action of a public body as required by ORS 279.526 is the resolution of the Board. … Dist. v. Gen. Ins. Co., supra. We, therefore, hold that a public body may not retroactively start the time running. To hold otherwise would be to open the door for a public body to circumvent the statute.

Saif Corp. v. Allen

320 Or. 192 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 29, 1994

Ohlig v. … Because the Board’s action is within the legislative policy behind ORS 656.262(6), the Board did not err. 22 Springfield Education Assn. v. School Dist., supra, 290 Or at 227 .

Warren v. MARION COUNTY

222 Or. 307 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1960

State v. Lermeny, 213 Or 574 , 326 P2d 768 (1958); Kempien v. Board of Com’rs. of Ramsey County, 160 Minn 69, 199 NW 442 (1924); 2 Sutherland, Statutory Construction (3rd ed), §4925. … In the creation of an administrative board it is not necessary to prescribe the specific procedure under which it must operate. Peninsula Corporation v. United States, supra; Whittle v.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v. Clatsop County

74 Or. 250 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1915

In proceedings before a board of equalization to correct the assessment of the property of taxpayers the rules of practice in civil actions or suits do not apply: Poppleton v. … make it conclusively appear that the method by which the assessor arrived at the result complained of was incorrect, and that the assessment does not represent the true cash value of the property assessed: Oregon Coal Co. v.

O. & C. R. R. v. Croisan

22 Or. 393 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1892

(Cooley on Taxation, 419; Desty on Taxation, 496; Getchell v. Supervisors, 51 Iowa, 107 ; People v. Nichols, 49 Ill. 517 ; McConkey v. Smith, 73 Ill. 313 .) … Co. v. Washington Co. 30 Gratt. 471 ; People v. Nichols, 49 Ill. 517 .) By the law of this state, for the purposes of assessment and taxation, there are only three classes of real property.

Barrett v. Belleque

344 Or. 91 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 7, 2008

The court relied upon Penrod/Brown v. … Penrod /Brown, 283 Or at 28 .

Corporation of the Sisters of Mercy v. Lane County

123 Or. 144 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1927

BROWN, J. Section 4235, Or. … Francis v. Board of Review, 231 Ill. 317 ( 83 N. E. 272 ), St. Joseph’s Hospital Assn. v. Ashland County, 96 Wis. 636 ( 72 N. W. 43 ), and State v. Powers, 10 Mo. App. 263 ( 74 Mo. 476 ).

Garbutt v. SAIF Corp.

297 Or. 148 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1984

In Oakley v. … The cases cited in Oakley, Larson v. Compensation Dept., 251 Or 478 , 445 P2d 486 (1968), and Collins v.

Baker v. Commercial Body Builders, Inc.

264 Or. 614 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1973

Plaintiffs’ contentions—Browning v. C & C Plywood Gorp. … Plaintiffs also say that in Browning v.