Case law

Sprague v. Straub

252 Or. 507 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1969

The distinction between a subscription to stock and a purchase of stock is well established. … Although in these cases the character of the fund was examined either in relation to the question of the immunity of the state from suit, or in relation to the applicability of Article XY, § 7, the conclusion that the state

State v. Patrick

131 Or. 209 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 29, 1929

We arrive at this conclusion without much consideration of the right of Caven to be immune as a witness from incriminating himself. … attention, together with such circumstances of time, places and persons present as to enable him to readily understand the particular statements alluded to by the interrogator, and he then denies making them or .attempts to qualify

State v. McCarthy

375 Or. 157 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 23, 2026

They establish that an otherwise operable vehicle may be so disassembled or be in such a state of disrepair that, even with reasonable repairs, it no longer qualifies as a vehicle under the statute. … Motor-propelled vehi- cles, sailboats, bnd gliders were clearly included. Buckboards, surreys, and horse-drawn carriages were clearly excluded.

State v. Megorden

49 Or. 259 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1907

An objection to the question on the ground that the witness was not qualified as an expert was overruled. … Justice Moore has clearly and ably discussed this rule in State v.

Schubel v. Olcott

60 Or. 503 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 23, 1912

That the petition was signed by 674 legally qualified voters of the county of Clackamas, more than the percentage required for that purpose. … And a county is clearly a municipality or district, within the meaning of this section: Acme Dairy Co. v. Astoria, 49 Or. 520, 523 ( 90 Pac. 153, 155 ); Cook v.

Marquam v. Ray

65 Or. 41 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1913

Rep. 912 ), says: “ ‘The language used in the grant of general power is certainly very comprehensive, but the established rule of construction limits the authority derived by the general grant of power to the acts authorized … This clearly means he is to sell or mortgage the lot in order to raise money for Georgia Eiley. When he has raised the móney, he has exhausted the power and his authority to sell is terminated.

State v. Cochran

55 Or. 157 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 12, 1909

The local option law concerns only the “sale or disposition” of spirituous liquors, and, as stated, is clearly within the St. Johns charter exemption on the subject. … It is the wisely established policy of all courts in English speaking countries not to set aside or disregard well-established precedents in order *168 to meet special emergencies.

Peterson v. State Compensation Department

257 Or. 369 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1970

We think the legislature in 1951 clearly intended that only those workmen who, after their claims had been rejected, established their right to compensation were entitled to attorney fees paid as an administrative expense … In order to qualify a workman had to prevail over a commission order rejecting his claim.

Vega v. Farmers Insurance

323 Or. 291 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1996

As indicated, the text of ORS 742.504 does not, in itself, establish which of the foregoing meanings was intended. … Just as clearly, the policy term disfavors insureds more than ORS 742.504(7)(c)(A) does.

Timber Structures, Inc. v. C. W. S. Grinding & MacHine Works

191 Or. 231 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1951

Kreipe was a well-qualified expert in his line. … The statute is strictly construed as to persons entitled to its benefits and as to the procedure necessary to perfect the lien; but when the claimant’s right has been clearly established, the law will be liberally interpreted

Hurst v. W. J. Lake & Co.

146 Or. 500 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1934

To establish the custom, plaintiff called as a witness E. W. Lazell, who qualified as an expert chemical engineer with experience in Portland since 1900. … clear that the contract read a minimum 50%, which meant just exactly that, for we would have to get some material under 50% at the discount in order to be compensated based on the price we paid you. ’ ’ This letter would clearly

State v. Christy

131 Or. 314 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 11, 1929

Kelly, 41 Or. 20 ( 68 P. 11 ): “It is usual and perhaps requisite that the time and place should qualify or be added to every alleged fact in an information or indictment for felony.” … The defendant contends that a fatal variance exists between the description of the animals as established by the proof and their description in the indictment.

State v. Carmody

50 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 20, 1907

The reasons which impel us to this conclusion are so clearly and forcibly stated by Mr. Justice Orton, in Briffitt v. State, 58 Wis. 39 ( 16 N. W. 39 : 46 Am. … for at the bar, in a saloon or hotel, the bartender would know at once, from the common use of the word, that strong beer—a spirituous or intoxicating beer—was wanted; and, if any other kind was wanted, the word would be qualified

Kerns v. Couch

141 Or. 147 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 2, 1932

Devers: Objected to on the ground that the plaintiff has not shown himself qualified to testify *155 on such matter and for the further reason it is an effort to establish damages, the same damages that the plaintiff sought … to establish in presenting her claim to the county court and that tribunal passed upon the matter and from the findings of that court she did not appeal.

State v. O'Key

321 Or. 285 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1995

Daubert, 509 US at_, 113 S Ct at 2795 , 125 L Ed 2d at 480 . 18 The Court first focused on the language of FRE 702, which clearly contemplates some degree of regulation in the admission of expert testimony concerning “scientific … Moreover, no particular reason of logic or good sense exists to immunize particular areas or principles simply on the basis of longevity or the fact that their introduction antedated imposition of the new standard.

Voight v. Nyberg

218 Or. 383 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1959

The foregoing instruction was clearly erroneous. … It seems to be a well established rule of law that the driver of a passing car is under no obligation to make certain that his clearly audible signal is heard and understood by the driver of the overtaken vehicle.

Rae v. Morgan

125 Or. 644 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1928

We believe that this evidence was clearly admissible. … From this it is clear that when the notice was inserted in the “Klamath News” it was a publication qualified under the statutes to publish the notice.

Goodale Lumber Co. v. Shaw

41 Or. 544 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 14, 1902

The law, however, does not require the performance of vain things; and where, as in the present instance, the testimony set out in the bill of exceptions clearly shows the mode adopted to prove a particular fact, and also … The directors, when elected and qualified, shall elect one of their number president: Hill’s Ann. Laws, § 3225.

Edwards Farms, Inc. v. Smith Canning & Freezing Co.

197 Or. 57 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1952

It is true that the above testimony was later weakly qualified to the extent that Edwards claimed that such understanding was had on a Saturday a few days before the harvest. … In that case we quoted with approval from Pomeroy’s Equity Jurisprudence, 5th ed., § 856b, as follows: “ ‘Even a clearly established negligence may not of itself be a sufficient ground for refusing relief, if it appears that

Ladd v. City of Portland

32 Or. 271 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1898

Under the power thus delegated, the board of trustees of East Portland, in 1883, made a full improvement of Fifth street in front of plaintiffs’ property by building to the established grade an elevated roadway thirty-six … And it may be regarded as equally well settled, though not without protest on the part of the state courts and the earnest dissent of-several of the federal judges, that a contract by the state granting immunity from taxation