Case law

Fitzpatrick v. Sletten

117 Or. 173 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1926

Brown, 102 Or. *177 389, 393 ( 202 Pac. 719, 720 ); Friendly v. Lee, 20 Or. 205 ( 25 Pac. 396 ). The particular items making up the receipts and expenses were immaterial to the issues joined in this action. … J., and Brown and Belt, JJ., concur.

Shubert v. Blue Chips

330 Or. 554 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 24, 2000

findings that the Board had made. … See Russell v.

Mattila v. Mason

287 Or. 235 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1979

Thus, as held in Bailey v. … Petitioner contends that custodial arrest, and therefore bail, is one of the "indicia” of a criminal prosecution and, as such, is constitutionally impermissible in a traffic infraction case for reasons stated in Brown v.

In re Halttunen

367 Or. 360 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 24, 2020

Linn and the board panel. … See Cole/Dinsmore v.

State ex rel. Multnomah County Education Service District v. Dooley

295 Or. 138 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1983

In the meantime, beginning on February 22, 1983, the case of School District No. 1 et al v. Multnomah County Education District, et al, was tried. Neither side called any of the ESD board members as witnesses. … Dept. v. Holland, 290 Or 765, 767 , 625 P2d 1318 (1981); Coin Millwork v. Lbr. & Sawmill Union, 248 Or 617, 620 , 435 P2d 1015 (1968). Cf. Callbeck et al v.

State v. MacY

295 Or. 738 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1983

In the case of a life sentence, under the current statute only the Parole Board may determine the period of *742 actual incarceration of the individual so sentenced. … The Court of Appeals is reversed and that portion of the sentence imposing a 10-year minimum is vacated. 1 In State v. Reams, 292 Or 1 , 636 P2d 913 (1981), this court cited State v.

Murphy Citizens Advisory Committee v. Josephine County

319 Or. 477 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 11, 1994

by the Board of Commissioners.” … See Murphy Citizens Advisory Com. v. Josephine County, 123 Or App 539, 543-45 , 860 P2d 857 (1993) (Warren, P.

Hostetler v. Eccles

112 Or. 572 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1924

Cas. 1135); Harris v. Frink, 49 N. Y. 24 ( 10 Am. Rep. 318 ); Reeder v. Sayre, 70 N. Y. 180 ( 26 Am. Rep. 567 ); Bittinger v. Baker, 29 Pa. St. 66 (70 Am. Dec. 154); Sievers v. Brown, 34 Or. 454 ( 56 Pac. 171 , 45 L. R. … J., and Bean and Brown, JJ., concur.

Menasha Corp. v. Crawford

332 Or. 404 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2001

An administrative law judge (ALJ) and the Workers’ Compensation Board (Board) held that claimant was entitled to temporary compensation for the period in question. The Court of Appeals reversed. Menasha Corp. v. … Shortly after the Board issued its Crawford decision, the Court of Appeals, in an en banc decision, reversed Bundy. Fred Meyer, Inc. v.

Medford Irr. Dist. v. Hill

96 Or. 649 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1920

Co. v. … v.

State v. Deal

43 Or. 17 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1902

That the instruction described the subject of the larceny at the first trial as a brown gelding does not vitiate it. … Ev. (8 ed.) p. *52; Williams v. State, 52 Ala. 411 ; Sayres v. State, 30 Ala. 15 ; Belt v. State, 103 Ga. 12 ( 29 S. E. 451 ).

In Re Complaint as to Conduct of Galton

289 Or. 565 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1980

Sadler v. Oregon State Bar, 275 Or 279, 294 , 550 P2d 1218 (1976). More accurately they are codified in ORS 9.460, 9.480 and 9.500 to 9.520. There are additional provisions governing professional conduct. … The review board may adopt, modify or reject the report and any recommendation of a trial board, may take additional evidence or rerefer the matter to a trial board for further proceedings. *568 "(2) The review board shall

Rysdam v. School District No. 67 of Union County

154 Or. 347 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1936

In Dennis v. Wrigley, 175 Mich 621 ( 141 N. … Woodward, Law of Quasi Contracts, p. 310; Forsyth v. Ganson, 5 Wend. (N. Y.) 558, 21 Am. Dec. 241 ; Rundell v. Bentley, 53 Hun. (N. Y.) 272, 6 N. Y. S. 609.” Sommers v. Board of Education, supra.

Hughes v. Gilsoul

191 Or. 557 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 2, 1951

she furnished these meals and board with the expectation it would be paid for, but paid for by reasonable value. … See Cade v. Thompson, 190 Or. 242 , 225 P. 2d 396 ; Rayburn v. Day, 126 Or. 135 , 268 P. 1002 . *562 This is a case where a mother is suing her daughter for board.

State Ex Rel. Kiesel's Estate v. Bishop

169 Or. 448 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1942

The legality of that municipal body was sustained by this court in State v. Nyssa-Arcadia Drainage District , 80 Or. 524 , 157 P. 804 . In 1916 the district issued and sold $70,000 of bonds. … We have carefully read State ex rel. v. Little River Drainage District , 334 Mo. 753 , 68 S.W.2d 671 , upon which the defendants rely.

Multifoods Specialty Distribution v. McAtee

333 Or. 629 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 11, 2002

The Court of Appeals reversed the board, holding that employer had not accepted the prior degenerative condition. Multifoods Specialty Distribution v. McAtee, 164 Or App 654 , 993 P2d 174 (1999). … We allowed claimant’s petition for review, and now we review the board’s order for errors of law. Wilson v. State Farm Ins., 326 Or 413, 415 , 952 P2d 528 (1998). This case involves two questions.

Warner Valley Stock Co. v. Morrow

48 Or. 258 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1906

The state land board under our law is the land department of the State: Corpe v. Brooks, *263 8 Or. 223 ; Robertson v. State Land Board, 42 Or. 183, 187 ( 70 Pac. 614 ). And, as stated by Mr. … of a certificate of purchase from the board to another applicant under the act and receiving a deed from the board for such lands in his own name.

State v. Ogle

291 Or. 364 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1981

Brown, 262 Or 442 , 497 P2d 1191 (1972). … Under Brown v.

Clark v. Wick

25 Or. 446 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1894

The first assignment of error is in the admission of evidence tending to show that plaintiffs furnished board for the defendant and feed for his stock, as alleged in the complaint, and that they purchased the Cree and Fitzwater … Y. 402 ; Walgamood v. Randolph, 22 Neb. 493 , 35 N. W. 217 . An allegation of partnership is only necessary when the cause of action depends on its existence: Abbott’s Trial Evidence, § 203; Loper v. Welch, 3 Duer. 644.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Obert

336 Or. 640 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 6, 2004

In re Brown, 326 Or 582, 601 , 956 P2d 188 (1998). … Picard v. Connor, 404 US 270, 275-76 , 92 S Ct 509 , 30 L Ed 2d 438 (1971). See also Coleman v.