Case law

Hall v. Brown

102 Or. 389 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1921

The rule is thus stated in the syllabus to Leonard v. Southern Pacific Co., 21 Or. 555 ( 28 Pac. 887 , 15 L. R. … R. 11), and State v. Holbrook, 98 Or. 43 ( 188 Pac. 947 , 192 Pac. 640 , 193 Pac. 434 )'. 6.

Brown v. Sllverton

97 Or. 441 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1920

Sheridan v. … Law, 488 ( 10 Atl. 363 ); Mills v. Charleston, 29 Wis. 400 ( 9 Am. Rep. 578 ); Sanderson v. Herman, 108 Wis. 662 ( 84 N. W. 890 , 85 N. W. 141 ); Mayor v. Ulman, 79 Md. 469 ( 30 Atl. 43 ); City of Chester v.

State v. Brown

291 Or. 642 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1981

The defendant’s property from his person included a flat metal cigarette box and a very small brown glass vial with a plastic top. … The brown glass vial is 11/8 inches deep and 1/2 inch in diameter. The metal cigarette box was held shut by a piece of black electrician’s tape.

Brown v. Laird

134 Or. 150 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 6, 1930

Brown and Mrs. Sentner were adults and married at the time of the marriage of Mr. and Mrs. Mitchell. At that time Mr. … The case of Ladd v.

Childers v. Brown

81 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1916

While it is true that, as taught in Harrisburg Lumber Co. v. … The court had a right to use his discretion: Scheurmann v. Mathison, 67 Or. 419, 424 ( 136 Pac. 330 ); Nordin v. Lovegren Lumber Co., 80 Or. 140 ( 156 Pac. 587 ).

Brown v. Briggs

134 Or. 184 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1930

Brown advised defendant Charles A. … Brown and Nita Brown, his wife, entered into a written contract with defendants Charles A.

Brown v. Babcock

273 Or. 351 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1975

See Budd v. Nixen, supra at 854. … See also Citizens Ins. v. Signal Ins. Co., 261 Or 294, 297 , 493 P2d 46 (1972). Cf. Berry v. Branner, 245 Or 307, 311-12 , 421 P2d 996 (1966); and Frohs v.

Brown v. Bigné

14 L.R.A. 745 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 17, 1891

(Lathrop v. Amherst Bank, 9 Met. 489 ; Gilbert v. Holmes, 64 Ill. 548 ; Barker v. Barker, 14 Wis. 142 ; Lafferty v. Jelley, 22 Ind. 471 ; Halloway v. Lowe, 7 Port. (Ala.) 488; Weakly v. Hall, 13 Ohio, 167; 42 Am. … (Dorwin v. Smith, 35 Vt. 69 ; Findon v. Parker, 11 M. & W. 675; Stanley v. Jones, 7 Bing. 369.)

Brown v. Jones

137 Or. 520 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1931

In Multnomah County v. … Brown interrogated him thus: “Q.

Belle v. Brown

37 Or. 588 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1900

Y. 8 ; Ward v. Town of Southfield, 102 N. Y. 287 ( 6 N. E. 660 ); Mayor, etc. v. Brady, 115 N. Y. 599 ( 22 N. E. 237 ); Mather v. Parsons, 32 Hun, 338 ; Jones v. Jones, 71 Hun, 519 ( 24 N. Y. Supp. 1031 ) ; Rice v. … Rep.95); Finley v. Houser, 22 Or. 562 ( 30 Pac. 494 ); Crabill v. Crabill, 22 Or. 588 ( 30 Pac. 320 ); Christy v. Spring Val. Waterworks, 68 Cal. 73 ( 8 Pac. 849 ); Doolittle v. Don Mans, 34 Ill. 457 ; Irvin v.

Brown v. Harper

4 Or. 89 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1870

Hayden v. Brown

33 Or. 221 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1898

. § 2330; Gleeson v. … Justice Wright in Seaman v.

Brown v. Baker

39 Or. 66 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1901

Pl. & Pr. 462 ; Mayes v. Stephens, 38 Or. 512 ( 63 Pac. 760 ). … Rizor, *75 21 Or. 112 ( 27 Pac. 13 ); Cole v. Logan, 24 Or. 304 ( 33 Pac. 568 ); Low v. Rizor, 25 Or. 551 ( 37 Pac. 82 ).

Dillard v. Brown

363 Or. 744 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 25, 2018

The decision of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and this case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of Dillard v. Premo, 362 Or. 41 , 403 P.3d 746 (2017). Review Allowed

Chernaik v. Brown

367 Or. 143 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 22, 2020

Chernaik v. Brown, 295 Or App 584, 601, 436 P3d 26 (2019). … Chernaik v. Brown, 367 Or 143, 166, 475 P3d 68 (2020).

Herbring v. Brown

92 Or. 176 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1919

The same word is used in Sections 18 and 19 of Article IV, and Section 15 of Article V, and in the same sense as above indicated. We come now to the term “act,” as used in the Constitution. … from that here discussed, and in all necessary particulars the same in substance, the Supreme Court of that state has hold that the referendum can only be invoked against statutes and not against joint resolutions: Hopping v.

Bayne v. Brown

60 Or. 110 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1911

It is said in Talbot v.

Brown v. Irwin

187 Or. 462 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1949

Bean in Wilkes v. … Bean in State v.

State v. Brown

10 Or. 215 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1882

(McCauley v. Brooks, 16 Cal., 11 ; Smith v. The Controller of the State, 18 Wend., 659 ; People v. Stout, 23 Barb., 339 ; Agricultural Society v. … In Wall v.

State v. Brown

73 Or. 325 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1914

As said in Carroll v. … E. 537); Olson v. State, 143 Wis. 413 ( 127 N. W. 975); State v. Anderson, 127 La. 1041 ( 54 South. 344 , Ann. Cas. 1912A, 1103); Reismier v. State, 148 Wis. 593 ( 135 N. W. 153 ); State v.