Case law

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.

West v. Jaloff

113 Or. 184 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1924

The evidence in this case clearly establishes the fact that defendant’s said ambulance was giving due notice of its approach by loudly sounding a siren, and I instruct you, as a matter of law, that defendant’s agent and servant … The fifth request was for a directed verdict upon the ground, as stated, that the evidence clearly established certain facts concerning which, in truth, there was room for debate, and would have been a clear invasion of the

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Houchin

290 Or. 433 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1981

In that term he registered for classes that would qualify him for payment of educational benefits by the Veterans’ Administration (VA). In early October the college cancelled a class in which he had previously enrolled. … Such conduct is clearly not within any of the three specific situations described in DR 9-101(A),(B), or (C) and, therefore, *439 does not violate Canon 9. In re Ainsworth, 289 Or 479, 493 , 614 P2d 1127, 1134 (1980).

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.

Joseph v. Lowery

261 Or. 545 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1972

The cases discussed above clearly indicate that this court has refused to give retroactive application *549 to the provisions of statutes which affect the legal rights and obligations arising out of past actions. … Plaintiff contends that because this court retroactively abolished the tort immunity of charitable institutions, ⑥ we have established the precedent to make the present statute retroactive. The change in Hungerford v.

State v. Robinson

120 Or. 508 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 4, 1927

The evidence clearly indicates that Mrs. Adams and the defendant were acting together in negotiating these spurious checks with the intent to defraud the Bank of Sherwood. … Virtually, Section 1964—2, supra, establishes and defines what is tantamount to a presumption.

Tharalson v. State Department of Revenue

281 Or. 9 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 3, 1978

It is the established practice of this court to examine nonconstitutional issues that bear on the decision of a case before reaching claims that the state has violated its own or the federal constitution, and to choose between … A footnote qualifies this with the sentence: "Of course we have refused to be governed by this consideration when so to do would have placed a premium upon the avoidance of all state taxes.”

Toney v. Toney

84 Or. 310 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1917

Do the circumstances of this case clearly rebut the presumption that plaintiff intended to give the property in dispute to appellant? … The evidence clearly shows that plaintiff remained ignorant of the contents and effect of this deed for months after its execution.

State v. Bowman

373 Or. 213 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 30, 2025

Rule 703 in turn, together with Rule 702, describe special rules that govern the testimony of a qualified expert. … But, Rule 602 notwithstanding, it is unnecessary to endorse that expanded concept of “personal knowledge” to conclude that the evidence code clearly per- mits experts to testify to a matter within the scope of their “scientific

City of La Grande v. Public Employes Retirement Board

281 Or. 137 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1978

There a state law requiring a city to establish a civil service *146 system, administered by a prescribed city commission, was defended on the ground that it applied to all cities. … In a city, not more than 15 percent of the qualified voters may be required to propose legislation by the initiative, and not more than 10 percent of the qualified voters may be required to order a referendum on legislation

Kosmecki v. Portland Stevedoring Co.

190 Or. 85 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1950

. *94 The burden of proof rested upon thé defendant to establish the facts upon which its claim to immunity is predicated: Inwall v. Transpacific Limber Co., 165 Or. 560 , 108 P. 2d 522 , and Brown v. … Clearly, the term “premises” should not be confined within a small perimeter, but should be extended to the entire area where the work was in progress.

Southern Pacific Co. v. Brown

207 Or. 222 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 11, 1956

The word “usually” as used is a qualifying term. … The performance of “light repairs” at such a roundhouse or shop is merely incidental to the principal purposes of such establishments.

State v. Wiltse

373 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 7, 2024

The Court of Appeals then considered whether the instruction “qualified for plain-error review.” Id. … It is the jury’s role to determine whether the state has carried that burden; the jury must find the facts that establish the elements of the crime. Boots, 315 Or at 592.

State v. Bunting

71 Or. 259 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1914

The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which it is claimed the act contravenes, declares, inter alia, that “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall *262 abridge the privileges or immunities … In order to render a statute invalid by reason of discriminations which are clearly unreasonable, arbi *267 trary, oppressive, or partial, the vice of the law must be apparent upon its face.

Novick v. Myers

330 Or. 351 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 8, 2000

Section (l)(a) of the proposed measure would limit contributions and expenditures by both for-profit corporations and unions to $1,000 per election in support of or in opposition to a candidate or a qualified ballot measure … In petitioner’s view, the certified summary is deficient, because it does not explain clearly the different campaign *358 finance requirements for the different entities involved — for example, that a $1,000 limit applies

State v. Saunders

14 Or. 300 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1886

It does not apply to such documentary evidence to establish collateral facts, as would be admissible under the rules of the common law in other cases. Cooley Const. … The trial judge.heard their testimony, had an opportunity.to observe .their.manner., and deemed them qualified to *307 sit in the case.

Skinner and Skinner

370 Or. 534 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2022

In other words, because the maintenance awards that were imposed retroactively as a result of the 2018 corrected judgment did not exist in the 3 We also considered whether the state was immune from the imposition … We understand the Court of Appeals’ analysis to have been driven by the assumption that the trial court awarded impermissible “prejudgment interest” for which, under Chase, installment payments on support awards do not qualify

Purdy v. Deere & Co.

355 Or. 204 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2014

The plaintiffs asserted — and the defendant did not dispute — that, if Rector had been negligent, he and his employer, the Oregon State Police, were immune from liability to the plaintiffs under the exclusive remedy provision … In accordance with their view of the effect of that immunity, the plaintiffs sought various instructions admonishing the jury not to “weigh or consider” Rector’s conduct unless it found that it was the “sole and exclusive

Davis v. Wasco Intermediate Education District

286 Or. 261 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 1, 1979

Davis would have had a significant impact on the then-established laws governing teacher employment. HB 1474 was enacted in 1963. … Second, as noted above, ORS 236.630(3) would require school districts to establish "layoff lists” for teachers.

Lloyd Corporation v. Whiffen

307 Or. 674 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 9, 1989

Clearly they can if they do so reasonably and peaceably. … A8406-03528), then Circuit Judge William Dale in fact entered such a detailed and qualified order.