Case law

State v. Yarde

121 Or. 297 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 9, 1927

*298 BROWN, J. Albert McFarland was an agent appointed by tbe prohibition commissioner under the provisions of Chapter 228, General Law of Oregon 1925. … See State v. Hamilton, 80 Or. 562 ( 157 Pac. 796 ); State v. Williams, 117 Or. 238 ( 243 Pac. 563 ); State v. De Ford, 120 Or. 444 ( 250 Pac. 220 ).

In Re Rogue River Adjudication

120 Or. 237 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1926

He also filed with the State Water Board, as did Cameron, a statement and proof of claim, in which he asserted that he was the sole owner of the ditch in controversy. … Thus it was held in Ison v.

Bosak v. Myers

332 Or. 552 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 4, 2001

See Patrick Hardin et al., eds., The Developing Labor Law: The Board, the Courts, and the National Labor Relations Act (3rd ed 1992). … See Elvin v. OPEU, 313 Or 165, 170 , 832 P2d 36 (1992) (discussing “fair share” agreements). Union and employers negotiate union security agreements to avoid the “free rider” problem. See Dale v.

Chaffin v. Chaffin

239 Or. 374 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1964

E. g., Cramer v. Cramer, 379 P2d 95 (Alaska 1963); Klein v. Klein, 58 Cal2d 692, 376 P2d 70 (1962); Brown v. Gosser, 262 SW2d 480 ; 43 ALR2d 626 (Ky 1953). … Goller v. White, 20 Wis2d 402, 122 NW2d 193 (1963).

Shaw v. Northwest Truck Repair, Inc.

273 Or. 452 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1975

of Trustees may waive the payment of any liquidated damages in any particular case upon the establishment of good cause satisfactory to the Board of Trustees. … In Harty v.

City of Portland v. Albee

67 Or. 221 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1913

Justice Lord in Deane v. Willamette Bridge Co., 22 Or. 167, 176 ( 29 Pac. 440, 443 , 15 L. R. … To the same effect as illustrating the legal principle under consideration, see the cases of Smith v. King, 14 Or. 10, 14 ( 12 Pac. 8 ); McLeod v. Scott, 21 Or. 94, 109 ( 26 Pac. 1061 , 29 Pac. 1 ); McFarlane v.

Rice v. City of Portland

141 Or. 205 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1932

As stated in Santoro v. … and within the lines of the running board.

Daniels v. Riverview Dairy

132 Or. 549 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1930

The instruction, as requested, was based upon one approved by this court in Archer v. Gage, 126 Or. 532 ( 270 P. 521 ), and, by reason thereof, defendant urges it was error thus to modify it. … J., Bean and Brown, JJ., concur.

Winters v. Bisaillon

153 Or. 509 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1936

Tolman, 12 Or. 289 , 7 Pac. 103 ; Morrill v. Morrill, 20 Or. 96 , 25 Pac. 362 , 11 L. R. A. 155, 23 Am. St. Rep. 95 ; Belle v. Brown, 37 Or. 588 , 61 Pac. 1024 ; White v. Ladd, 41 Or. 324 , 68 Pac. 739 , 93 Am. St. … Koehler v. Holt Mfg. Co., 146 Cal. 335 , 80 P. 73 .” Also see Freitag v. Renshaw, 9 N. J. Misc. 1161 ( 157 Atl. 455 ), and Carter v.

Department of Revenue v. Universal Foods Corp.

311 Or. 537 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1991

Co. v. … Originally enacted as Oregon Laws 1909, chapter 218, section 37, the predecessor of OES 305.190(1) gave the board of state tax commissioners power to subpoena “in conformity to the resolutions or rules of the board.”

Smith v. McDuffee

72 Or. 276 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 9, 1914

Gordon, 6 Or. 175 ; House v. Jackson, 24 Or. 89 ( 32 Pac. 1027 ); Hayden v. Brown, 33 Or. 221 ( 53 Pac. 490 ); Bogard v. Barhan, 52 Or. 121 ( 96 Pac. 673 , 132 Am. St. Rep. 676 ); St. Dennis v. … In Grim v. Robinson, 31 Neb. 540 ( 48 N.

Hale v. Cottle

21 Or. 580 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1892

(Baldwin v. Brown, 16 N. Y. 359 ; Higgenbotham v. Stoddard, 72 N. Y. 94 ; Railroad Co. v. Stigeler, 61 N. Y. 348 ; White v. Luning, 93 U. S. 514 ; Davis v. Rainsford, 17 Mass. 207 .) … (Fitzpatrick v. Dubois, 2 Saw. 434 ; Ramsey v. Loomis, 6 Or. 367 .) Under the law, it was the duty of the surveyor-general “to survey and mark the claim with the boundaries as *587 claimed.” (Donation Law, § 6.)

Corliss v. Van Duzer

132 Or. 265 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1930

J., in Hall v. … “In Bowden v.

Grossman v. City of Oakland

36 L.R.A. 593 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1895

S. (10 Wall.) 497 ; Village of Des Plaines v. Poyer, 123 Ill. 348 ( 5 Am. St. Rep. 524 , 14 N. E. 677 ); Quintini v. City Board of Aldermen, 64 Miss. 483 ( 60 Am. Rep. 62 , 1 So. 625 ); Chicago & Rock Island R. R. … Co. v. City of Joliet, 79 Ill. 44 ; Hutton v. City of Camden, 39 N. J. Law, 122 ( 23 Am. Rep. 203 ).

State v. Schriber

185 Or. 615 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1949

R. 606; Campoamor v. State Live Stock Sanitary Board, 136 Fla. 451 , 182 So. 277 ; Stickley v. Givens, 176 Va. 548 , 11 S. E. (2d) 631 . … State Live Stock Sanitary Board, supra; Stickley v. Givens, supra; State v. Main, supra; Miller v. Schoene, State Entomologist, 276 U. S. 272 , 72 L. ed. 568, 48 S.

State v. Rowen

104 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1921

Carr, 6 Or. 133 ; State v. Bergman, 6 Or. 341 ; Cranor v. City of Albany, 43 Or. 144 ( 71 Pac. 1042 ); State v. White, 48 Or. 416 ( 87 Pac. 137 ); State v. Bilyeu, 64 Or. 177, 180 ( 129 Pac. 768 ); State v. … J., and Johns and Brown, JJ., concur.

Heitkemper v. Schmeer

130 Or. 644 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 15, 1929

BROWN, J. The plaintiff contends that Schmeer is the trustee of a resulting trust, whereas it is the contention of the defendants that the trust is not a resulting, but an express, trust. The case of Neppach v. … See, also, Thompson v.

Raiha v. Coos Bay Coal & Fuel Co.

77 Or. 275 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 29, 1915

Clarke-Woodward Drug Co., 65 Or. 516 (133 Pac. 351); Schulte v. Pacific Paper Co., 67 Or. 334 ( 135 Pac. 527 , 136 Pac. 5 ); Dunn v. Orchard Co., 68 Or. 97 ( 136 Pac. 872 ); Wasiljeff v. … Hatuley Paper Co., 68 Or. 487 ( 137 Pac. 755 ); Browning v. Smiley-Lampert Lumber Co., 68 Or. 502 ( 137 Pac. 777 .) An error was committed in giving the instruction complained of.

Neil v. Wilson

14 Or. 410 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1887

(Ex parte McNiel, 13 Wall. 236 ; Steamship Co. v. Joliffe, 2 Wall. 450 ; Cooley v. Board of Wardens, 12 How. 299 ; The California, 1 Saw. 463 .) … (The Corporation of New Orleans v. *415 Winter et al., 1 Wheat. 92 ; Hepburn v. Ellzey, 2 Cranch, 445 .) But the cases are not alike.

River Bros. v. C.F.T. Co., Inc.

124 Or. 157 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1928

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