Case law

Union School District No. 5 v. Stanley

185 Or. 531 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1949

Each petition was signed by the requisite number of qualified voters. … Subdivision 6 of the same section provides that the “notices of election shall clearly state that the question of forming a union high school district for high school purposes only, specifying the districts to be united,

Miller v. Union County

48 Or. 266 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1906

Polk County, 15 Or. 578 ( 16 Pac. 420 ), was announced, the statute has been amended so that a board of county road view *270 ers, consisting of the county surveyor, the county roadmaster and one qualified freeholder, take … These words being synonymous, the use of the latter term by the county court clearly expresses its intention and sufficiently conforms to the legal mandate. 2.

City of Astoria v. Cornelius

119 Or. 264 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1925

Cornelius, is a duly elected and qualified county judge of Clatsop County and defendant, John Frye, is the duly elected qualified and acting county commissioner of said county of Clatsop, State of Oregon. *267 The writ sets … L., used both terms and clearly manifested the intent that the funds mentioned shall be used in the betterment of both such highways under the management of the city officials.

Peninsula Lum. Co. v. Royal Indemnity Co.

93 Or. 684 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 21, 1919

In this state the precept is thoroughly established and of long standing that in suits to reform a written instrument on the ground of mistake the complaint must clearly state what the original agreement of the parties was … If the party making this absolute statement would qualify it by an exception, it is incumbent upon him to state the exception, because it is presumably within his knowledge.

Radich v. Fredrickson

139 Or. 378 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1932

Several decisions of this court indicate clearly that one can not obtain a monopoly of fishing in the navigable waters of this state in such a manner. See, for instance: Hume v. … in navigable waters, otherwise adapted thereto, is in violation of section 20, article 1 of the state constitution, which commands that: ‘No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities

State v. Kragt

368 Or. 577 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 30, 2021

Relatedly, the record does not clearly indicate when defendant committed each of the underlying crimes. … The text does not expressly address how many PPS terms a defendant should receive if sentenced for multiple qualifying offenses.

Brown v. Bonesteele

218 Or. 312 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1959

In the cases cited the equipment was used under definite leasing arrangements clearly establishing a special contract of carriage; in the instant case there was no substantial evidence to establish a special contract negativing … The weakness in this position is that the character of the previous transaction was never clearly established as a lease arrangement rather than as a regular agreement for transportation by a common carrier.

Hammond v. Oregon & California R.

98 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 9, 1920

To confirm means “to make firm or firmer, to establish, to strengthen,” and “to ratify”: Webster’s International Dictionary. … The maxim, “Ex dolo malo non oritur actio,” is qualified by another, namely, “In pari delicto melior est conditio defendentis.”

Greene v. Kulongoski

322 Or. 169 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 12, 1995

ORS 9.160 provides: “Except for the right reserved to litigants by ORS 9.320 to prosecute or defend a cause in person, no person shall practice law or represent that person as qualified to practice law unless that person … “SUMMARY: State statutes now forbid any person to practice law unless qualified as an active member of the Oregon State Bar. Current law directs the Bar to investigate allegations of the unlicensed practice of law.

State v. Olds

19 Or. 397 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1890

The importance of any immunity, however, does not depend so much upon constitutional guarantees as it does upon their observance and enforcement. … If the assumption that the attorney indulged in, that the gamblers of Portland had conspired to take Weber’s life and Olds *437 shooting him was a part of the conspiracy, could have been sustained it would have established

State v. Sanchez-Alfonso

352 Or. 790 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 29, 2012

Skinner did not establish that she was qualified to 11 identify the perpetrator of inflicted injury. … Although Skinner 6 established that she was qualified to assess whether a child has been subjected to abuse, 7 her testimony she did not sufficiently describe the techniques that she had used to identify 8 the

Branch v. McCormick's Estate

72 Or. 608 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1914

The contention seems to be that the law-making power, proceeding under this clause, may establish any number and kind of courts within its discretion without let or hindrance. … In at least the respect mentioned, the act of the legislative assembly in question is clearly a transgression upon the restriction of the Constitution, and for this reason, if for no other, the judgment of the Circuit Court

Splonskofsky v. Minto

62 Or. 560 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 13, 1912

These are both direct attacks upon the validity of the organization, while the present litigation is clearly a collateral onslaught. … Although they may have alleged sufficient to qualify them as parties plaintiff, they have utterly failed to prove the same; and hence upon this, if upon no other grounds, their suit should fail.

State v. Vondehn

348 Or. 462 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 1, 2010

The issue in Soriano was whether Article I, section 12, permits the state to compel the testimony of a witness in exchange for "use" or "derivative use" immunity without also extending "transactional immunity." … Transactional immunity precludes the state from prosecuting the witness for any offense to which the statements relate. Id.

In Re Reinstatement of Starr

330 Or. 385 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 21, 2000

She has the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that she “has the requisite good moral character and general fitness to practice law and that [her] resumption of the practice of law in this state will … Suspended lawyers also must refrain from conduct that conveys an impression that they are qualified to practice law.

State v. Murray

11 Or. 413 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1884

The point attempted to be made by the appellant’s counsel that the evidence was insufficient to justify a verdict of murder in, the first degree, is clearly untenable. … The circuit court may have believed the jury better qualified to pass upon the question than the court was, and as the evidence tended to show that the witnesses were intimate acquaintances of the appellant, concluded to

Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc.

Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 17, 2014

First, the court observed that the release “clearly and unequivocally” expressed defendant’s intent to disclaim liability for negligence. Id. at 550 Bagley v. Mt.  … Harper, 306 Or 347, 349-50, 759 P2d 253 (1988), the court abolished interspousal immunity, holding ‘that the common-law rule of interspousal immunity is no longer available in this state to bar negligence actions

Fields v. Fields

139 Or. 41 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 18, 1931

That the provisions of paragraph 3 of the testator’s will conveyed a fee simple title to Lillie Maud Fields, his wife, is fully established by our code and by a number of court decisions. In the case of Lytle et al. v. … A trust is created if it clearly appears that the words were used in an imperative sense; but this only where the testator’s desires can be ascertained with reasonable certainty, the subject and the object being clear.

Smejkal v. Rice

273 Or. 687 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1975

The pleadings in that action are clearly available for that purpose but the proof is not limited to them. … Also, at page 580, § 11.20: “In order to resolve such ¡an ambiguity [in a *698 verdict] the proponent of the former judgment may put in evidence any parts of the former record and oral testimony of a qualified observer (extrinsic

Stebco Inc. v. Gillmouthe

189 Or. 427 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1950

Taxation of all property is the general rule and the burden rests upon any owner who claims exemption to prove clearly the exception upon which he depends. … H. 286, held immune from New Hampshire taxation logs which had been cut in Vermont and which were destined for Connecticut.