Case law

State Board of Education v. Fasold

251 Or. 274 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 25, 1968

Article IV, § 23, Oregon Constitution; Harris v. Burr, 1898, 32 Or 348 , 52 P 17 , 39 LRA 768; Campbell et al v. Aldrich et al, 1938, 159 Or 208 , 79 P2d 257 ; Monaghan v. … For similar pronouncements see the Yearbooks of School Law for prior years. ③ State v. School District No. 3, 1915, 78 Or 188, 192, 193 , 152 P 221, 222 ; The Supreme Court of Iowa, in Becker v.

Strecker v. Psychiatric Security Review Board

320 Or. 491 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1994

Calderon-Pacheco v. State Board of Parole

309 Or. 454 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1990

The Board rejected the evidence on the basis that it was not “directly related to the circumstances surrounding the crime.” The Court of Appeals affirmed from the bench. Calderon-Pacheco v. … In support of this argument, the Board cites Anderson v. Board of Parole, 303 Or 618 , 740 P2d 760 (1987), Evensizer v. Board of Parole, 301 Or 403 , 723 P2d 318 (1986), and Price v.

Delehant v. Board on Police Standards & Training

317 Or. 273 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1993

Delehant v. Board on Police Standards, 115 Or App 598 , 839 P2d 737 (1992). We allowed review and now affirm. The pertinent facts are not in dispute. … See, e.g., Durfee v. Duke, 375 US 106, 109 , 84 S Ct 242 , 11 L Ed 2d 186 (1963); Riley v. New York Trust Co., 315 US 343, 348-49 , 62 S Ct 608 , 86 L Ed 885 (1942); Morphet v.

Clark v. Jackson County

313 Or. 508 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1994

ORS 197.835 provides in relevant part: “ (7) In addition * * * the board shall reverse or remand the land use decision under review if the board finds: “(a) The local government or special district: *514 «c* * * * * “(C) … See Yamhill County v. Ludwick, 294 Or 778, 789 , 663 P2d 398 (1983) (applying principle); West Hills & Island Neighbors v.

Merrill v. Board of Architect Examiners

300 Or. 34 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1985

The State Board of Architect Examiners (BAE) fined petitioner $1,000 for unlicensed practice of architecture contrary to ORS 671.020. 1 The practice of architecture is defined to mean the “planning, designing or supervision … The arrangements between the school board, Merrill, and Thaler were oral and their relationships were “blurred,” but Merrill was not Thaler’s employe.

Janowski v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

349 Or. 432 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 23, 2010

Severy v. … v.

Stitt v. Police Board

40 Or. 619 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1902

Stitt, Patrick Murray, and Mose "Waller, respectively, are companion cases to Venable v.

State v. State Board of Dental Examiners

96 Or. 529 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 13, 1920

of dental examiners, and at the time of making such an *533 application shall pay to the secretary of the board a fee of $25 and shall present himself or herself at the first regular meeting thereafter of said board, for … of dental examiners,’ be *534 exempt from the provisions of this act, and be issued a license by the state board of dental examiners, to conduct, manage and maintain a dental office or parlor, upon the payment to the board

Brown v. Kotek (Petition for writ of habeas corpus allowed)

Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2024

224 MISCELLANEOUS SUPREME COURT DISPOSITION CERTIFIED QUESTIONS, CERTIFIED APPEALS, MANDAMUS PROCEEDINGS, AND OTHER MATTERS April 26, 2024 Brown, Terri … Lee v.

Edney v. Columbia County Board of Commissioners

318 Or. 138 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1993

Edney v. Columbia County Board of Commissioners, supra, 117 Or App at 389 . … Edney v. Columbia County Board of Commissioners, supra, 119 Or App at 12.

Brown v. DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES DIV.(DMV)

345 Or. 175 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 6, 2008

190 P.3d 1237 (2008) 345 Or. 175 BROWN v. DRIVER AND MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICES DIV. (DMV). No. (S056269). Supreme Court of Oregon. August 6, 2008. Petition for review denied.

Brush v. State Board of Higher Education

245 Or. 373 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1966

. *375 Our decision here is controlled by Baggett v. Bullitt, 377 US 360 , 84 S Ct 1316 , 12 L ed 2d 377 (1964). … West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 US 624 , 87 L ed 1628, 63 S Ct 1178 , 147 ALR 674 .

Haynes v. Board of Parole

Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 5, 2017

Stogsdill v. Board of Parole, 342 Or 332, 336, 154 P3d 91 (2007) (citing Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 US 209, 224, 125 S Ct 2384, 162 L Ed 2d 174 (2005)); see also Greenholtz v. … Board of Pardons v.

Weems v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

347 Or. 586 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 4, 2010

Weems v. Board of Parole, 221 Or App 70, 75 , 190 P3d 381 (2008); Roberts v. Board of Parole, 221 Or App 278, 282 , 190 P3d 397 (2008). … See Brumnett v.

Haynes v. Board of Parole

Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 5, 2017

Stogsdill v. Board of Parole, 342 Or 332, 336, 154 P3d 91 (2007) (citing Wilkinson v. Austin, 545 US 209, 224, 125 S Ct 2384, 162 L Ed 2d 174 (2005)); see also Greenholtz v. … Board of Pardons v.

Seaunier v. Board of Parole

303 Or. 677 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1987

For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Anderson v. … Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 632 , 740 P2d 760, 769 (1987), I respectfully dissent from that portion of this opinion dealing with a “detailed explanation,” under ORS 144.135, of the action taken by the Board of Parole with

Schmidt v. Board of Parole

303 Or. 673 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1987

For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Anderson v. … Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 632 , 740 P2d 760, 769 (1987), I respectfully dissent from that portion of this opinion dealing with a “detailed explanation,” under ORS 144.135, of the action taken by the Board of Parole with

Moore v. Board of Parole

303 Or. 668 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1987

For the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Anderson v. … Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 632 , 740 P2d 760, 769 (1987), I respectfully dissent from that portion of this opinion dealing with a “detailed explanation,” under ORS 144.135, of the action taken by the Board of Parole with

Hines v. Board of Parole

303 Or. 662 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1987

Petitioner seeks review, alleging that the Board failed to satisfy the requirements of ORS 144.135 in sustaining the 60-month minimum. Petitioner’s procedural contentions are answered in Anderson v. … Board of Parole, 303 Or 618 , 740 P2d 760 (1987).