Case law

Claussen v. Ireland

216 Or. 289 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1959

He distinguishes Brown v. Underwood Lumber Co., 172 Or 261 , 141 P2d 527 ; Atkinson v. Fairview Dairy Farms, 190 Or 1 , 222 P2d 732 ; Inwall v. Transpacific Lumber Co., 165 Or 560 , 108 P2d 522 . Tooze, J., (Warner, C. … Supporting the conclusions we have reached are, Long v. Springfield Lumber Mills, Inc.; Atkinson v. Fairview Dairy Farms; Brown v. Underwood Lumber Co.; Inwall v. Transpacific Lumber Co., all supra. Affirmed.

Richardson v. Investment Co.

124 Or. 569 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 14, 1928

Justice BEAN, speaking for the court in McDonald v. … RAND, C.J., and BEAN and BROWN, JJ., concur. Costs disallowed either party March 20, 1928. ON OBJECTIONS TO COST BILL. ( 265 P. 1117 .)

Portland General Electric Co. v. City of Estacada

194 Or. 145 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1952

City of Los Angeles, 42 CalApp 479, 183 P 822 ; Crowl v. Board of Trustees, 109 CalApp 214, 292 P 985 ; Sage v. City of Plattsmouth, 48 Neb 558, 67 NW 455 ; Kuhn v. … Brown v. Webb, 60 Or 526, 530 , 120 P 387 ; State v. Several Parcels of Land, 78 Neb 703, 111 NW 601 ; 8 Fletcher, Cyc Corp perm ed, §§ 3790, 3791. As to Webb v. Clatsop Co.

Lee v. Paulsen

273 Or. 103 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 9, 1975

In Ramstead v. … Mick v.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Hiller

298 Or. 526 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1985

According to Hiller’s testimony before the trial board, he looked up “sale” in Words and Phrases and found an Indiana case, Pachter v. … Pachter v.

Booth v. National Surety Co.

129 Or. 598 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1929

Defendant relied strongly on Peacock v. Kirkland, 74 Or. 279 ( 145 Pac. 281 ), and Gust v. Edwards, ante, p. 409 ( 274 Pac. 919 ). … Brown, J., absent.

Thompson v. Connell

31 Or. 231 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1897

Taaffe, 29 Cal. 422 ; 1 Black on Judgments, § 354; Lovejoy v. Willamette Locks Company, 24 Or. 569 ( 34 Pac. 660 ); Askren v. Squire, 29 Or. 228 ( 45 Pac. 779 ); Willett v. Millman, 61 Iowa 123 ( 15 N. … Other authorities attest the availability of such a ground of relief by motion to vacate in the original action: See Binsse v. Barker, 13 N. J. Law 263 ( 23 Am. Dec. 720 ); Browning v. Roane, 9 Ark. 354 ( 1 Am.

Willamette Valley Lumber Co. v. State Tax Commission

226 Or. 543 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1961

Powell v. State Bd. of Pilot Com’rs, 224 Or 122 , 355 P2d 224 ; P. U. Com. v. Portland Traction Co., 222 Or 614 , 331 P2d 344 . … Since the decision of Myers v.

Phez Co. v. Salem Fruit Union

113 Or. 398 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1924

Rep. 470 ); Second National Bank v. Grand Lodge, 98 U. S. 123 ( 25 L. Ed. 75 , see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes); Pardee v. Treat, 82 N. Y. 385 ; Berry v. Brown, 107 N. Y. 659 ( 14 N. E. 289 ). In 13 C. … Brown, J., concurs. Burnett, J., concurs in the result.

Pacific Power & Light Co. v. Paulus

282 Or. 41 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1978

Formation initiated by County Board resolution or voters’ petition. Public hearing eliminated when District includes entire county. Allows division of municipality. … In Manny v. Paulus, 281 Or 215 , 573 P2d 1248 (1978), and Blumenauer v.

Surratt v. Gunderson Bros. Engineering Corp.

259 Or. 65 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 26, 1971

Upon review, the Workmen’s Compensation Board affirmed the hearing officer. Claimant then appealed to the circuit court. … The following is contained in the Board’s order: “The hearing officer affirmed the determination of disability but the Board deems it necessary to correct the discourse by the hearing officer indicating that ‘education, economic

State v. Stewart/Billings

321 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1995

Dept. v. … COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES Defendants also rely on Brown v. Multnomah County Dist.

Cullison v. Downing

42 Or. 377 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1903

The answer not having set up the illegality now relied upon, the defendants are not entitled, as a matter of right, to take advantage of their own wrong: Ah Doon v. Smith, 25 Or. 89 ( 34 Pac. 1093 ). In Miller v. … Evans, 21 Or. 309 ( 28 Pac. 67 ); Ah Doon v. Smith, 25 Or. 89 ( 34 Pac. 1093 ); Bradtfeldt v. Cooke, 27 Or. 194 ( 40 Pac. 1 , 50 Am. St. Rep. 701 ); Pacific Livestock Co. v.

Balfour v. Burnett

28 Or. 72 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1895

In Leese v. … Barney, 5 Or. 211 ; Bank of British Columbia v. Paige, 7 Or. 455 ; Leinenweber v. Brown, 24 Or. 548 ( 34 Pac. 475 ); Bays v. Trulson, 25 Or. 109 ( 35 Pac. 26 ).

Drew v. Gant

1 Or. 197 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1855

Umpqua County was organized in 1851, and the Trenton Ferry was established on the application of Drew, at the first session of the board of county commissioners in that county. … If there was an order in 1852, as Huntington testifies, allowing Drew to keep said ferry for one year, it amounted to nothing, for, in the first place, the commissioners had no power to make such an order; (Cason v.

State v. MacElrath

49 Or. 294 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1907

Harlocker, 48 Or. 90 ( 85 Pac. 328 ); State ex rel. v. Rhodes, 48 Or. 133 ( 85 Pac. 332 ); State ex rel. v. Malheur County Court. 46 Or. 519 ( 81 Pac. 368 ); State ex rel. v. … Prior to the adoption of the constitution the probate business and that of the counties was transacted by separate tribunals — one the probate court, and the other the board of county commissioners (Laws 1854-55, pp. 338,

Leathers v. Snook

238 Or. 177 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1964

Brown v. Jones, 137 Or 520 , 3 P2d 768 ; Frangos v. Edmunds, 179 Or 577 , 173 P2d 596 ; Hesse v. Mittleman, 145 Or 421 , 27 P2d 1022 ; ORS 17.510. … See Brindle v. McCormick Lumber & Mfg. Corp., 206 Or 333 , 293 P2d 221 . We hold that the giving of such an instruction was within the trial court’s discretion in this case. The assignments of error lack merit.

Gunderson, LLC v. City of Portland

352 Or. 648 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 8, 2012

The final order of the Land Use Board of Appeals is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded to the Land Use Board of Appeals for further proceedings. … See, e.g., Dept. of Human Services v. J. R.

Multnomah County v. Mittleman

275 Or. 545 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1976

Kadderly v. … Roy v.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Holm

285 Or. 189 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 7, 1979

590 P.2d 233 (1979) 285 Or. 189 In re Complaint As to the Conduct of Roger V. HOLM, Accused. No. 1434; SC 25676. Supreme Court of Oregon. Argued and Submitted December 4, 1978. Decided February 7, 1979. Thomas E. … The Disciplinary Review Board concurred in the findings and conclusions of the Trial Board and also found that accused violated disciplinary rule DR6-101(A)(3), which provides that a lawyer shall not neglect *234 a legal