Case law

Tomlinson v. Metropolitan Pediatrics, LLC

362 Or. 431 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 8, 2018

Gilroy, 296 Or 718, 734, 681 P 2d 776 (1984) (adopting Restatement (Second) § 895G approach and abolishing parental immunity except in instances where the act is not tor- tious or is privileged). … A physician who fails to take reasonable care to preserve that chance clearly has acted adversely to the patient’s interests.

Goddard v. Farmers Insurance

344 Or. 232 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 6, 2008

Once that rough numerical reference point is established, the other guideposts come into play. … Defendant contends that a course of conduct against a single individual does not qualify as “repeated actions.”

Cobb v. Galloway

167 Or. 604 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1941

During the entire time involved the Standard Box and Lumber Company has been an existing corporation qualified under the law and its articles of incorporation to deal in real estate as well as to engage in the lumber business … Thus some distributions within the broad meaning of the term might be taxable as dividends while others clearly would not.

Jones v. Four Corners Rod and Gun Club

366 Or. 100 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 30, 2020

Defendant established a prima facie case for equitable relief. … We agree with plaintiff and the dissent, how- ever, that the restitution claim, nevertheless, might be dis- qualified if we were to determine that defendant’s conduct in the transaction was inequitable.

State v. Ainsworth

346 Or. 524 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 23, 2009

court was unwilling to hold that “the legal effect of the judgment, for purposes of appeal,” could be “impaired by the clerk’s failure to comply with an administrative duty” in the absence of an express statutory provision “clearly … Second, even if the trial court’s reentry of the identical judgment could qualify as a “modification” of the judgment, ORCP 71 C is a reservation of inherent trial court authority, not a source of inherent authority.

State v. Miller

300 Or. 203 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1985

This is required to encourage patients to discuss frankly and freely their mental or emotional problems so that the professional can accurately determine whether he or she is qualified to treat them. … “Clearly, the two requisites of the doctrine are linked; however, the major thrust of each can be separated.

Frankland v. City of Lake Oswego

267 Or. 452 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1973

The trial court, on the other hand, held that this test did not apply but that the test was "whether there has been a showing that the action taken by the city and its planning commission was clearly unreasonable and arbitrary … The effect of our opinion is to say either that the term "garden apartment" has no meaning, or that if it does we, rather than the city council, will decide which structures qualify under that term.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Paulson

346 Or. 676 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 3, 2009

DR 2-106(A) DR 2-106(A) prohibits a lawyer from charging an illegal or clearly excessive fee. … Instead, he disputes only whether his conduct qualified as the practice of law.

Gouge v. David

185 Or. 437 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 10, 1948

. *443 For several years the appellant operated establishments in which he sold and served beer. … In our opinion, the act clearly states that all licenses must, expire December 31.

Pacific Power & Light Co. v. Department of Revenue

286 Or. 529 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1979

Defendant appeals from a decree of the Oregon Tax Court. 1 Plaintiff Pacific Power and Light Company is a Maine corporation qualified to do business in Oregon, California, Washington, Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. … Plaintiff’s 'assessment year income’ is clearly an incorrect projection when compared with the Department’s 'annual cash flow projection.’ ” Both parties cite the case of Mt. Bachelor v.

In re Spencer

355 Or. 679 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 26, 2014

We review the record de novo to deter- mine whether the Bar established the alleged violations by clear and convincing evidence. … Given the complaint’s limited focus, we conclude that the Bar has not established that the accused violated RPC 1.7(a).

Service v. Sumpter Valley Ry. Co.

88 Or. 554 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1918

It was clearly interstate in its nature. ’ ’ In 1911 was decided Southern Pac. Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm., 219 U. S. 498 ( 55 L. Ed. 310 , 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 279). … To be a good eomplaint, immune from the effects of a general demurrer, the plaintiff must show in himself legal connection with the matter involved in litigation and a right in himself to recover the amount demanded. *588

Ritter v. BEALS

225 Or. 504 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1961

The place where Larsen was put to work had been created by defendant before it *532 employed him, and that it was a dangerous place the casualty establishes. … That the majority know this to be the rule is clearly pointed out in the case of Shields v. W.R. Grace & Co., 91 Or 187, 201 , 179 P 265 , from which they quote: "6.

Layne v. Portland Traction Co.

212 Or. 658 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1957

The testimony of the engineer then establishes that he observed the Johnston vehicle when it stopped (Tr. 421). … The plaintiff qualified his answer, as our quotation from his testimony indicates, by saying: "If that train was properly lighted."

Davidson v. Apple Growers Ass'n

159 Or. 473 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 12, 1938

To accomplish this system of operation, the capital stock of defendant, except the shares necessary to qualify its directors as such, was placed with the Butler Banking Company in trust for the benefit of the members of defendant … This clearly distinguishes the case at bar from Hood River Orchard Co. v. Stone, supra.

State v. Beauvais

Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 16, 2015

The state asserts that a medical expert is uniquely qualified to discern and explain the sig- nificance of such a connection to a lay trier of fact. … “the preliminary facts are not case-specific”). 13   On review, the state asserts that defendant made a generalized pretrial objection to the KIDS Center report that is unavailing because much of the report was “clearly

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Phillips

338 Or. 125 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 2005

The Accused misled [his] clients by having trust reviewers present [law firm] business cards without clearly disclosing that the reviewers were also insurance salespersons and agents of [FSN]. “2. … The ABA Standards establish, as a preliminary matter, that suspension is the appropriate sanction for each of the three violations.

State v. Oatney

335 Or. 276 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 10, 2003

The state introduced evidence that, if believed, would establish that Johnston and defendant had acted together in killing the victim. … Defendant introduced evidence that, if believed, would establish that Johnston had acted alone in killing the victim.

Sears v. Steel

55 Or. 544 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1910

I deem the precedent established, by holding the act under consideration void, to be far-reaching and portentous in its resultant effects. … Steel appears eminently qualified to give evidence bearing upon the issues presented, and his testimony before the trial court so fully, clearly, and specifically points out the facts, from which the advantages accruing,

Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Hill

229 Or. 437 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1961

The company's witnesses established, at least prima facie, that the part of the plant represented by the sum of $6,194,114 was devoted to intrastate *447 service and established in like manner that the above expenses and … No one contradicted, challenged or qualified this part of Mr. Bushnell's testimony.