Case law

Klein v. Miller

159 Or. 27 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1938

Ann. 881 ( 2 So. 807 ); Burghart v. Brown, 60 Mo. 24 ; Gerhab v. White, 40 N. J. L. 242; Van Benthuysen v. DeWitt, 4 Johns 213; Murray v. King, 30 N. C. (8 Ired L.) 528; Ames v. Sloat, Wright (Ohio) 577; Neville v. … Sec. 758; Clement v. Lewis, 3 Brod. & B. 297); Moore v. Evans, 24 Idaho 153 ( 132 P. 971 ). In the case of Herr v.

State v. Bosch

139 Or. 150 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1932

Edmunson, 87 Or. 476 ( 171 P. 186 ); Duniway v. Hadley, 91 Or. 343 ( 178 P. 942 ); Bottig v. Polsky, 101 Or. 530 ( 201 P. 188 ); Veazie v. Columbia etc., 111 Or. 1 ( 224 P. 1094 ); Obermeier v. … J., Brown and Belt, JJ., concur.

Perez v. Potier

179 Or. 123 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 1, 1946

Harris v. Craven, 162 Or. 1, 19 , 91 P. (2d) 302 . … Harris v. Craven, supra, and cases cited; Booher v. Brown, 173 Or. 464 , 146 P. (2d) 71 .

Scott v. Bogard

124 Or. 673 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 6, 1928

As stated in Low v. … Bean and Brown, JJ., concur.

Fulp v. Brashears

116 Or. 538 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1925

Brown, 49 Or. 423, 425 ( 90 Pac. 673 ); Fisher v. Kelly, 30 Or. 1 ( 46 Pac. 146 ); Guille v. Wong Fook, 13 Or. 577 ( 11 Pac. 277 ). This has been the settled law in this state for a long time. … Conde, 22 Or. 581 ( 30 Pac. 454 ); Mellott v. Downing, 39 Or. 218, 224 ( 64 Pac. 393 ); Moorhouse v. Donaca, 14 Or. 430 ( 13 Pac. 112 ).

McGregor Co. v. Heritage

291 Or. 420 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1981

Corp. v. … In other words, it provides a shuttle service for those who failed to board the vessel before it left the dock.” 49 Or App at 497-98 .

Ralston v. Bennett

93 Or. 519 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1919

In Washington Bridge Co. v. Stewart, 3 How. 413, 425 ( 11 L. Ed. 658 , see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes), the Supreme Court of the United States by Mr. … In Brown on Jurisdiction of Courts (2 ed.), Section 2, page 7, it is said: “If there be a petition that is subject to be assailed by demurrer, if so attacked, and the court having its power called in question, or rather in

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Spies

316 Or. 530 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1993

Michael Spencer represented the defendant, Klamath County Board of Commissioners. … The accused violated DR 7-104(A)(1). 9 *537 V.

State v. Stevenson

98 Or. 285 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1920

BROWN, J. … in substantially its present wording, first appeared in the Code of 1853, prepared by the Code commission authorized by an act of the territorial legislative assembly passed in January, 1853, entitled “An Act to Create a Board

State v. Dunbar

48 Or. 109 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 3, 1906

This is the well-recognized principle as announced by many of the highest tribunals of our states: Fletcher v. Tuttle, 151 Ill. 41 ( 37 N. E. 683 , 25 L. R. A. 143, 42 Am. St. Rep. 220 ); People v. Canal Board, 55 N. … Y. 393 ; Smith v. Meyers, 109 Ind. 1 ( 9 N. E. 692 , 58 Am. Rep. 375 ); Hardesty v. Taft, 23 Md. 513 ( 87 Am. Dec. 584 ); Sheridan v.

STUDLEY v. LUSE

89 Or. 338 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1918

of tax commissioners, and define the powers and duties of such board. … In the case of McMillan v.

Behnke-Walker Business College v. Multnomah County

173 Or. 510 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1943

In Board of Assessors v. Garland School of Home Making, 296 Mass. 378 , 6 N. … In Board of Supervisors v.

Freeman v. State Industrial Accident Commission

116 Or. 448 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 10, 1925

BROWN, J. Under Or. L., Section 6617, subdivision (1), the operation of a wood-saw is defined as a hazardous occupation. … Com., 104 Or. 452, 469 ( 205 Pac. 984 ); Helmuth et al. v. Industrial Acc. Com. et al., 59 Cal. App. 160 ( 210 Pac. 428, 429 ); Hanna v. Warren, 77 Ind. App. 1 ( 133 N. E. 9 ); Marietta v. Quayle, 79 Ind.

Yamhill County v. Ludwick

294 Or. 778 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 3, 1983

In Robinson v. … American Community Builders v. City of Chicago Heights, 337 Ill App 263, 85 NE2d 837 . Northern Indiana Public Service Co. v. McCoy, 239 Ind 301, 157 NE2d 181 . And see Kirchin v.

State v. Briggen

112 Or. 681 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1924

BROWN, J. The defendant challenges the validity of the indictment by objecting to the state’s testimony. The accusation made by the grand jury reads: “The said H. E. Briggen, on the 8th day of January, A. … A. 853); State v. Foot You, 24 Or. 61 ( 32 Pac. 1031 , 33 Pac. 537 ); State v. Robinson, 32 Or. 43 ( 48 Pac. 357 ); State v. Fiester, 32 Or.. 254 ( 50 Pac. 561 ); State v. Schuman, 36 Or. 16 ( 58 Pac. 661 , 47 L. R.

Caples v. Morgan

81 Or. 692 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1916

Cooper, 8 Allen (Mass.), 334; Page v. Parker, 43 N. H. 363 ( 80 Am. Dec. 172 ); Mackenzie v. Seeberger, 76 Fed. 108 ( 22 C. C. A. 83 ); Brown v. Castles, 11 Cush. (Mass.) 348. … Carter, 24 Conn. 392 , and *701 Seamen v. Becar, 15 Misc. Rep. 616 ( 38 N. Y. Supp. 69 ). Cases like Prescott v. Brown, 30 Okl. 428 ( 120 Pac. 991 ), Stauffer v. Hulwick, 176 Ind. 410 ( 96 N. E. 154 , Ann.

State v. Turner

296 Or. 451 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1984

The Court of Appeals in State v. … In State v.

Christie v. Great Northern Railway Co.

142 Or. 321 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1933

Cave v. Brown & McCabe, Stevedores, Inc., 128 Or. 286, 291 ( 274 P. 505 ); Wike v. Oregon-Washington R. & N. Co., 83 Or. 678, 682 ( 163 P. 825 ); St. Louis, S. W. Ry. Co. v. Gillenwater (Texas), 284 S. … It was held in Cave v. Brown & McCabe, Stevedores, Inc., supra, in effect, that, in an action under the Seamen’s Act of March 4, 1915, § 20, as amended by the Act of June 5, 1920, § 33, 46 U. S. C.

Hornefius v. Wilkinson

51 Or. 45 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1908

Krimbel, 29 Or. 76 ( 43 Pac. 865 ); Patterson v. Patterson, 40 Or. 560 ( 67 Pac. 664 ); Keene v. Eldriedge, 47 Or. 179 ( 82 Pac. 802 ); Madden v. Welch, 48 Or. 199 ( 86 Pac. 2 ); Bade v. … See, also, Crown Cycle Co. v. Brown, 39 Or. 285 ( 64 Pac. 451 ); Humbird v. Davis, 210 Pa. 311 ( 59 Atl. 1082 ); Hindmarch v. Hoffman, 127 Pa. 284 ( 18 Atl. 14 : 4 L. R. A. 368: 14 Am. St. Rep. 842 ). 4.

Heikkila v. Ewen Transfer Co.

135 Or. 631 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1930

The complaint is therefore fatally defective: Jenkins v. Carman Mfg. Co., supra; Delthony v. Standard Furniture Co., supra; Perry v. … Brown, Belt and Kelly, JJ., concur.