Case law

Portland State University Chapter of the American Ass'n of University Professors v. Portland State University

352 Or. 697 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 29, 2012

See, e.g., EEOC 9 v. Board of Governors of State Colleges, 957 F2d 424 (7th Cir), cert den, 506 US 906 10 (1992) (hereinafter Board of Governors) (so holding). … Board of Parole, 348 Or 131, 139, 229 17 P3d 595 (2010) (stating same principle); Newport Church of the Nazarene v.

Security Savings & Trust Co. v. Lane County

152 Or. 108 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1935

In State Land Settlement Board v. … State Land Settlement Board v. Henderson, supra, and Board of Regents v. Hamilton, supra, merely found that the title was vested in the state under an assumed name.

Lewis v. Klamath Irrigation District

237 Or. 466 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1964

They are: Philomath v. Ingle, 1902, 41 Or 289 , 68 P 803 ; Bridges v. Multnomah County, 1919, 92 Or 214 , 180 P 505 . … Naylor v. McColloch, Mayor, 1909, 54 Or 305 , 103 P 68 ; State ex rel v. Funk, 1922, 105 Or 134, 159 , 199 P 592 , 209 P 113 ; Forrester v. City of Hillsboro, 1937, 156 Or 89 , 66 P2d 496 .

Cooper v. North Coast Power Co.

117 Or. 652 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1926

BROWN, J. The motion filed by defendants challenges the sufficiency of plaintiff’s evidence to take the question of their alleged neglect to the jury. … On the side next to the highway it was brush and boards; there was an open space from the cabin to the highway, steps part of the way, an open space, no fencing at all.”

State Ex Rel. Boe v. Straub

282 Or. 387 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 23, 1978

The Governor appointed a person to the Board who was not confirmed by the Senate committee and this person took the oath of office as a member of the Board. … Loe *392 v. Britting, 132 Or 572 , 287 P 74 (1930); State ex rel. Chapman v. Appling, 220 Or 41 , 348 P2d 759 (1960).

Barton v. Simmons

129 Or. 457 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1929

v. … Brown] 50 N. H. 552. See [Kearney v. Vaughan] 50 Mo. 287 . In formal instruments it has been held to mean voidable; 4 B. & Aid. 401; 4 Bing. (N. C.) 395; and in contracts of infants: 14 Ir. C. L. 61.

Husky Lumber Co. v. D. R. Johnson Lumber Co.

282 Or. 481 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1978

The short pieces were then put through a "finger-jointer” to make boards of uniform length. These boards were then stored until they were needed for reprocessing to fill a particular order. … See, e.g., Wall v. S.E.C. Company, 270 Or 553, 565-566 , 528 P2d 1054 (1974); Schafer v. Sunset Packing, 256 Or 539, 544 , 474 P2d 529 (1970); Furrer v.

Mathel v. Josephine County

319 Or. 235 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1994

The Workers’ Compensation Board initially affirmed the referee’s order. Thereafter, however, the Court of Appeals decided SAIF v. Hukari, 113 Or App 475 , 833 P2d 1307 , rev den 314 Or 391 (1992). … The Court of Appeals, sitting in banc, affirmed the Board’s order on reconsideration. Mathel v. Josephine County, 122 Or App 424 , 858 *238 P2d 450 (1993).

Lane Council of Governments v. Lane Council of Government Employes Ass'n

277 Or. 631 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1977

In Myers v. … See also Moran v.

Nally v. Richmond

105 Or. 462 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1922

What was done thereafter was merely to aggravate or increase the damages. ’ ’ In Brown v. Manter, 32 N. H. 468, the court said: “The gist of the action of trespass is the disturbance of the possession. … Bean, Brown and McCouRT,t JJ., concur.

Oak Lodge Sanitary District v. General Insurance

240 Or. 103 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1965

No. 1 v. … For cases requiring unconditional acceptance under a comparable statute, see Graybar Electric Co., Inc. v. Manufacturers Casualty Co., 21 NJ 517, 122 A2d 624 (1956); Paul H. Jaehnig, Inc. v. Standard Accident Ins.

State v. Johnson

80 Or. 107 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 11, 1916

W. 96 ); Hart v. Plum, 14 Cal. 148 ; Walker v. Edmonds, 197 Pa. 645 ( 47 Atl. 867 ); State v. West Duluth Co., 75 Minn. 456 ( 78 N. W. 115 ); Hill v. Wolfe, 28 Iowa, 577 ; Sharpe v. … Dec. 243 ); Board of Supervisors v. Betts, 53 Hun, 638 ( 6 N. Y. Supp. 934 ). 5.

Lucke v. State Compensation Department

254 Or. 439 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1969

In Romero v. … We reaffirmed this principle in Ryf v. Hoffman Construction Company, 254 Or 624 , 459 P2d 991 , decided October 22, 1969.

Bolt v. Influence, Inc.

333 Or. 572 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 28, 2002

Id. at 461-66 (citing, e.g., Tippin v. Ward, 5 Or 450, 453 (1875); Collins v. United Brokers Co., 99 Or 556, 559-60 , 194 P 458 (1921)). … State v. Brown, 306 Or 599, 602 , 761 P2d 1300 (1988) (emphasis in original). In other words, “[o]nly when there is no evidence to support an element may the claim be withdrawn from the jury’s consideration.”

Manley v. Smith

88 Or. 176 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1918

Ann. 14 ; Eldridge v. Dexter & P. R. Co., 88 Me. 191 ( 33 Atl. 974 ); Leslie v. Merrick, 99 Ind. 180 ; Hawkins v. Hawkins, 50 Cal. 558 ; Starr v. Bennett, 5 Hill (N. Y.), 303; Gibson v. Brown (Tex. Civ. App.), 24 S. … Lewis, 5 Or. 169 ; Stephens v. Murton, 6 Or. 193 ; Epstein v. State Ins. Co., 21 Or. 179 ( 27 Pac. 1045 ); Kleinsorge v. Rohse, *191 25 Or. 51 (34 Pac. 874); Mitchell v. Holman, 30 Or. 280 ( 47 Pac. 616 ); King v.

State v. Dunn

53 Or. 304 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1909

State v. Brown, 7 Or. 186, 209 ; State v. Turner, 34 Or. 173, 181 ( 52 Pac. 92 : 56 Pac. 645 ). 2. … Mill v. Brown, 31 Utah, 473, 480-482 ( 88 Pac. 609 : 120 Am. St. Rep. 935 ). 3. But, as held in Mill v.

Haskin v. Greene

205 Or. 140 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1955

This principle was recognized, though the point was not involved, in In re Hackbart, 203 Ia 763, 210 NW 544 , 52 ALR 895 , and Carlson v. Presbyterian Board of Relief, supra. … Adams v. Rockingham Ins. Co. 29 Maine, 292; White v. Brown & als. 2 Cush. 412 .” *153 See, also, Sisk v. Rapuano, 94 Conn 294, 108 A 858, 11 ALR 1291 ; Annotations, 11 ALR 1299 , 1313; Russel v.

Rowley v. City of Medford

132 Or. 405 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 7, 1930

*Page 415 7 Words Phrases, title "Resolution," citing The Village of Altamont v. The Baltimore O.S.W. Ry. Co. , 184 Ill. 47 , 56 N.E. 340 , (citing Chicago N.P.R.R. Co. v. … City of Chicago , 174 Ill. 439 , 51 N.E. 596 ); Reynolds v. Blue , 47 Ala. 711 . The resolution was not a law, was not intended to be such, and was not binding on the city of Medford.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Weinstein

254 Or. 392 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1969

The Board of Governors, in reviewing the trial committee’s findings, concurred in the findings of guilt with reference to fifteen specifications of misconduct. … See Barnard v. United States, 342 F2d 309 (9th Cir), cert. denied, 382 US 948 , 86 S Ct 403 , 15 L Ed 2d 356 (1965).

Whitney v. Blackburn

17 Or. 564 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 3, 1889

A petition or complaint as soon as filed is pending (Clendenin v. Allen, 4 N. H. 387), and the word “pending” implies that, the cause is in court. (Thomas v. Hopkins, 2 Browne, 146.) … (Howard v. Shields, 16 Ohio, 136; Rounds v. Smith, 71 Me. 380 ; Nelson v. Lucas, 43 Mo. 292 ; State v. Peniston, 2 Neb. 100 ; State v. Long, 91 Ind. 351 .)