Case law

Portland v. Bituminous Paving Co.

44 L.R.A. 527 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 7, 1898

Such, in effect, is the holding of the court in Brown v. Jenks, 98 Cal. 10 ( 32 Pac. 701 ) wherein the court say : " This act contains no grant of authority to the city council for keeping a street in repair. … Louis v. Davidson, 102 Mo. 149 ( 22 Am. St. Rep. 764 , 14 S. W. 825 ). State Board of Agriculture v. Citizens’ St. Ry. Co. 47 Ind. 407 ( 17 Am. Rep. 702 ) is to the same effect as applied to a private corporation.

In re Complaint as to the Conduct of Lenske

259 Or. 228 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 26, 1971

State ex rel Oregon State Bar v. Lenske, 243 Or 477 , 405 P2d 510 , 407 P2d 250 (1966). Plaintiff’s petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied, Lenske v. … We believe that'the fine of $500 and costs imposed upon the accused by this court in State ex rel *231 Oregon State Bar v.

Schaefer v. Montgomery Ward & Co.

167 Or. 679 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1941

Newton, 138 Or. 6 , 4 P. (2d) 314 (1931); Lloyd v. Brown, 138 Or. 58 , 288 P. 505 , 5 P. (2d) 83 (1931).” As stated by the late Mr. … Streby v.

Martin v. Martin

43 Or. 119 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1903

Such evidence is also competent to show that the transfer of personal property bj a conveyance absolute in form was in trust for the assignor: Chace v. Chapin, 130 Mass. 128 . … Plaintiff had ample means with which to pay his own board, and there is no reason adduced why he did not do so.

Redmond Realty Co. v. Central Oregon Irrigation District

140 Or. 282 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1932

In Medford Irrigation District v. … The primary and only source for the payment of warrants issued for operation and maintenance is the annual assessments levied and assessed by the board of directors: Kollock v.

Boardman v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania

84 Or. 60 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1917

Steger, 5 Or. 147 ; Lewis v. Lewis, 5 Or. 169 ; Stephens v. Murton, 6 Or. 193 ; McCoy v. Bayley, 8 Or. 196 ; Foster v. Schmeer, 15 Or. 363 ( 15 Pac. 626 ); Hyland v. Hyland, 19 Or. 51 ( 23 Pac. 811 ); Meier v. … Board-man further says that two days after the fire, which happened on the night of August 2-3,1915, Mr.

Furtado v. Gemmell

242 Or. 177 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 8, 1965

Brown et ux v. Hassenstab et ux, 212 Or 246, 253 , 319 P2d 929 . Defendants’ contention that plaintiffs ratified the transaction has no merit. … The facts here are similar to Brown et ux v. Hassenstab et ux, supra.

Moser v. Hampton

298 Or. 171 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1984

Hampton, Deceased, Petitioner On Review, v. Clifford HAMPTON, Respondent On Review, and Denise Marie Jayne, Defendant. CA A27147; SC S30709. Supreme Court of Oregon. Argued and Submitted October 9, 1984. … Brown, Portland, argued cause for respondent on review. With her on response to petition for review were I. Franklin Hunsaker, R.G.

In re Complaint as to the Conduct of Bassett

240 Or. 284 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1965

In re Hallinan, 48 Cal2d 52, 307 P2d 1 (1957); In re Alker, 398 Pa 188, 157 A2d 749 (1960); In re Seijas, 52 Wash2d 1, 318 P2d 961 (1957); Tomlinson v. Lefkowits, 334 F2d 262 (5th Cir 1964); Chanan Din Khan v. … Barber, 253 F2d 547 (9th Cir 1958), cert. den. 357 US 920 (1958), 78 S Ct 1361 , 2 L Ed2d 1364; Tseung Chu v.

Ravlin v. Hood River Peoples' Utility District

165 Or. 490 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 11, 1940

Co. v. Public Service Commission, 225 Wis. 198 , 274 N. … The designation of polling places “to be the usual ones in such Parkdale, Odell, Barrett and Waueoma Precincts” is sufficient in the light of State ex rel. v. Bailey, 151 Or. 496 , 51 P. (2d) 671 , and City of Salem v.

Burton v. Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Co.

148 Or. 648 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1934

S. 208 ( 133 Misc. 899 ) ; West v. Baltimore & C. R. Co., 103 W. Va. 417 ( 137 S. E. 654 ); Bancroft v. C. P. R., 30 Man. L. R. 401; Burnetta v. Marceline Coal Co., 180 Mo. 241 ( 79 S. W. 136 ). … The legality *659 of such order was sustained by the United States Supreme Court in Pennsylvania Railroad, Company v. United States Labor Board, 261 U. S. 72 ( 67 L. Ed. 536 , 43 S.

First Nat. Bank v. Buckland Et Ux.

128 Or. 242 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 5, 1929

Brown, 127 Or. 551 ( 272 Pac. 914 ), opinion rendered December 29, 1928; Clarke v. Philomath College, 99 Or. 366 ( 193 Pac. 470 , 195 Pac. 822 ); Grant County Bank v. Hayes, 76 Or. 407 ( 149 Pac. 473 ); Hillsboro Nat. … Rand, Brown and Belt, JJ., concur.

State v. Gourley

209 Or. 363 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1956

In Carter v. La Dee Logging Co., supra, an independent contract logger was treated as one in such possession. … Plaintiff cites Carter v. La Dee Logging Co., supra, for the proposition that the duty imposed on owners is nondelegable.

Willard v. Bullen

41 Or. 25 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1902

In Allen v. … Law (1 ed.), 931; How v. Kane, 2 Pin. 531 ( 54 Am. Dec. 152 ); Brown’s Appeal, 17 Pa. 480 ; Callender v. Robinson, 96 Pa. 454 ; Van Valen v. Russell, 13 Barb. 590 .

Maeder Steel Products Co. v. Zanello

109 Or. 562 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1923

BROWN, J. … Brown v. Aurora, 109 Ill. 165, 167 . “Ultimate fact.

Pilling v. Travelers Ins. Co. (In re Comp. of Pilling)

365 Or. 236 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 18, 2019

PGE v. … See SAIF v.

In Re Scappoose Drainage District

115 Or. 541 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1925

In the case of In re Drainage District, Buschling v. … As we wrote in Stafford et al. v. Multnomah County Drainage Dist.

Farrin v. State Industrial Accident Commission

104 Or. 452 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1922

BROWN, J. … Brown v. Oregon Lbr. Co., 24 Or. 315, 317 ( 33 Pac. 557 ).

State v. Cox

91 Or. 518 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1919

Chastain, 19 Or. 176 ( 23 Pac. 963 ); State v. Sterritt, 19 Or. 352 ( 24 Pac. 523 ); State v. Gulley, 41 Or. 318 ( 70 Pac. 385 ); State v. Brown, 73 Or. 325 ( 144 Pac. 444); State v. … The court in Brown v. Volkening, 64 N. Y. 76 , said: “Possession means simply the owning or having a thing’ in one’s own power.” The circumstances of Campbell v. State, 3 Ala.

State v. Lark

316 Or. 317 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 20, 1993

That distinction in phrasing discloses the intent of the State Sentencing Guidelines Board (the Board) regarding the application of the subcategories. See State v. … See also State v.