Case law

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

Fouts v. Hood River

1 L.R.A.N.S. 483 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1905

Only qualified electors are permitted to vote at such elections. Ample provisions are then made for holding elections under the. act. … Clearly, not that the act should be a law or not be, for the law already existed. Indeed, it was not delegated to the people to decide anything.

Administrator of Veterans' Affairs v. U. S. National Bank

191 Or. 203 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1951

The qualifying words characterize old law to be changed rather than a new subject of new law. … That section provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, *222 upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

Jones v. Sinsheimer

107 Or. 491 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1923

I might qualify that and simply say this: That Mr. Sinsheimer was there. I says, ‘Sinehy’ — I have known Mr. Sinsheimer a long time — ‘Have you got any insurance on this proposition?’ … The injury is thoroughly established and it is admitted that the defendant’s automobile was a factor in the affair.

State v. Branstetter

332 Or. 389 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2001

In fact, this court’s case law establishes that “separateness” in some sense is a necessary attribute of a special statutory proceeding. … The statutory context clearly demonstrates that the forfeiture proceedings and the criminal action are not of a piece.

Carrier v. Hicks

316 Or. 341 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 21, 1993

Plaintiff was injured by an automobile driven by a customer of the tavern, Morgan, soon after Morgan left defendants' establishment. … A jury trial of the claim against the tortfeasor, notwithstanding the insurance payment, is clearly contemplated by motor vehicle insurance statutes.

Wilson v. Hendricks

164 Or. 486 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 7, 1940

Hendricks, deceased, has been established as $42,960.00.” … Hendricks are nonresidents and therefore not qualified to act as administrators of said estate; that A. S.

State v. Cancelmo

86 Or. 379 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1917

considering a requested instruction, which omitted the limiting word “intentional” in an attempted definition of the crime of assault, reviews many decisions of the courts of last resort and says: “I think these authorities clearly … By this means a presumption is not based upon a presumption, but upon a fact legally established.

CHRISTIAN v. La Forge

194 Or. 450 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1952

Haase, are duly appointed, qualified and acting members of, and constitute, the Oregon State Board of Barber Examiners, hereinafter referred to as the Board; that said Sherman Christian is President of the Board, Clarence … However, the court, in the Nebbia case, made it very plain that the rule established as respects the *470 milk industry did not necessarily apply to all businesses, trades, and occupations, and indicated quite clearly that

Marlin v. T'Vault

1 Or. 77 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1854

Clearly not, as any man of common sense must see. … No land districts were ever laid out, or land offices .established by Congress, where lands might be entered.

Quinn v. Walters

320 Or. 233 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1994

The majority, in addressing the factual issue, holds that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that Child qualified as an “Indian child” at any time relevant to this proceeding. … The ICWA is clearly concerned with the best interests of the “Indian child.”

Antin v. Union High School District No. 2

130 Or. 461 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1929

discharge the men whom he was compelled to use might be a good reason why he should be holden to exercise reasonable care in their selection, but we do not think that under the circumstances of this case it is sufficient to establish … Its exact limits have not been very clearly defined. Perhaps it includes Elder v. Bemis, 2 Met. [Mass.] 599, and Hawks v.

State v. Meiser

372 Or. 438 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 13, 2024

I agree with the majority opinion that the “sufficient by itself” test adopted by the Court of Appeals to establish that causal link was not what the legislature intended, and I agree with the majority opinion that, to establish … The legislative history of that stat- ute does not clearly explain what causal link the legislature intended, as the majority opinion acknowledges.

Wade v. Creighton

25 Or. 455 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1894

Clifford says: “They placed their names there at- the inception of the note, not as a collateral undertaking, but as joint promisors with the maker, and are as much affected by the consideration paid by the plaintiff, and as clearly … In this view, the reply was inconsistent with the complaint, which upon its face established a different liability.

Portland v. Inman-Poulsen Lum. Co.

66 Or. 86 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1913

McGinn, who was born and has lived all his life in the vicinity of the property in dispute; and his familiarity with its location and the conditions existing upon the ground admirably qualified him to understand the testimony … In 1885, long before the- defendants came into possession of the property, the City of East Portland established all street grades, but did not establish any grades through this particular tract, although establishing them

Mount v. Welsh

118 Or. 568 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1926

However, he practiced no deception in qualifying as a juror. He testified that he knew Dr; Welsh. GL B. … A county is a mere auxiliary of a state government and partakes of the state’s *585 immunity from liability.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Fadeley

310 Or. 548 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1990

Although many or most lawyers may act with pure motives, viz., to ensure a qualified judiciary and to ensure vigorous public debate, the outside observer cannot but think that the lawyer or potential litigant either expects … Not even the political nature of Primus’ offer entirely immunized her from scrutiny. This case is not like Primus . The Canon here does not sweep so broadly as did the disciplinary rule there.

State v. Freeland

295 Or. 367 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 26, 1983

As the Voters Pamphlet clearly stated, however, the objective of the 1974 amendment was to promote “fairness” as well as “efficiency.” … ad hoc, use of discretion that article I, section 20, imposes on the administration of other privileges or immunities.

McWilliams v. Gladden

242 Or. 333 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 17, 1965

“THE COURT: Have you been promised any reward or immunity for waiving that right? “THE DEFENDANT: No, I haven’t. “THE COURT: Have you been threatened or coerced into waiving that right? … The law of self-defense or the facts and circumstances requisite to establish that defense. “3. That intoxication is a defense to the ‘premeditation and deliberation’ element of first degree murder. “4.

State Highway Commission v. Assembly of God, Pentecostal

230 Or. 167 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1962

No effort was made by defendants to lay a foundation to qualify Mr. … 'Clearly he was not competent to testify as to the opinion of others and plaintiff was entitled to have it made clear that the witness’s opinion was solely his own.