Case law

State v. Grassman

157 Or. 696 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1937

J. 690, § 374; In re Idleman’s Commitment, 146 Or. 13, 27 ( 27 P. (2d) 305 ); Porter v. Eastern Kentucky Insane Asylum, 121 Ky. 816 ( 90 S. W. 263 ). … There is no room for the provision to be. deemed arbitrary: In re Sprain’s Guardianship v. State Board of Control, 219 Wis. 591 ( 263 N. W. 648 ); In re Sletto’s Estate, (Wis.) 272 N. W. 42 .

State v. Hall

339 Or. 7 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 15, 2005

Lower federal courts also have presumed that the analysis from Wong Sun and its progeny concerning the admissibility of confessions under the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule, see, e.g., Brown v. … In Brown v.

Keller v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.

214 Or. 654 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1958

A particularly careful analysis of the entire question is presented in Products Liability and the Food Consumer by Beed Dickerson, Little, Brown and Company, 1951. … Pepper Co. v. Brittain, 234 Ala 548, 176 So 286; Le Blanc v. Louisiana Coca Cola Bottling Co., 60 So2d 873, 221 La 919; Tafoya v. Las Cruces Coca Cola Bottling Co., 59 N Mex 43, 278 P2d 575 , and Rutherford v.

Arena v. Gingrich

305 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1988

Mayor v. Dowsett, supra, 240 Or at 238-39 . Following his lead, see Dewey v. A.F. … Compare Burrows v. Nash, 199 Or 114, 121 , 259 P2d 107 (1953), Lyons v. Browning, 170 Or 350, 354 , 133 P2d 599 (1943).

Oregon Lumber & Fuel Co. v. Nolan

75 Or. 69 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1914

Justice Dunbar in Stetson-Post Mill Co. v. Brown, 21 Wash. 619 ( 59 Pac. 507 , 75 Am. St. Rep. 862 ). See, also, Hall v. Parker, 94 Pa. 109 ; Boyer v. Keller, 258 Ill. 106 ( 101 N. E. 237 ); Curtin-Clark Hdw. Co. v. … In Albaugh v. Litho-Marble Dec. Co., 14 App. D. C. 113, the matter of statutory agency is not involved. In Rothe v. Bellingham, 71 Ala. 55 , and North Dakota Lbr. Co. v. Haney, 23 N. D. 504 ( 137 N.

Youmans v. Edgemont Investment Co.

138 Or. 377 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1932

The evidence being amply sufficient to sup-, port the findings of the trial court, the judgment must be affirmed on the authority of Holmes v. Burlingame Co., see ante p. 193 ( 6 P. (2d) 44 ); Cameron v. Edgemont Inv. … Co., 136 Or. 385 ( 299 P. 698 ); Pace v. Edgemont Inv. Co., see ante p. 32 ( 4 P. (2d) 633 .) It is so ordered, neither party to recover costs or disbursements. Bean, C. J., Brown and Kelly, JJ., concur.

Mahon v. Harney County Nat. Bank

104 Or. 323 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1922

BROWN, J. Under the testimony adduced upon the trial of this cause, Ira Mahon and James F. … In Thorsen v.

Overbeck v. Roberts

49 Or. 37 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1906

of Trade v. … Ed. 1031 ); Clews v. Jamieson, 182 U. S. 461 (21 Sup. Ct. 845: 45 L. Ed. 1183 ); Bangs v. Hornick (C. C.), 30 Fed. 97 ; Henning v. Boyle (C. C.), 112 Fed. 397 .

American Trust Co. v. McCallister

136 Or. 338 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1931

In Eagle Insurance Co. v. … Brown, Belt and Campbell, JJ., concur.

Knowles v. Gladden

227 Or. 408 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1961

In State ex rel Smith v. … Chairman of Board of Parole, 81 F Supp 592 (DC Pa 1948), affirmed 175 F2d 780 (3rd Cir,1949); United States v. Marrin, 227 F 314 (DC Pa 1915); Davis v. Rhyne, 181 Kan 443, 312 P2d 626 (1957); Rawls v.

Corliss v. Van Duzer

132 Or. 265 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1929

It was said by Best, C.J., in Hall v. … "In Bowden v.

State v. Logston

374 Or. 101 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 31, 2025

See State v. … Engweiler v. Board of Parole, 343 Or 536, 540, 175 P3d 408 (2007). Under the indeterminate sentencing system that existed when ORS 137.123 was enacted, there was no such thing as a “sentence” of probation.

Miller v. State Industrial Accident Commission

84 Or. 507 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1917

Brown, Attorney General, and Mr. Joseph A. Benjamin, Third Assistant Attorney General. For respondent there was a brief over the names of Mr. James U, McMenamin and Mr. Eugene Bland. Mr. … Leas, 127 Md. 572 ( 96 Atl. 764 ), holds that the language of the act necessarily implies the taking of testimony by the appellate court and the doctrine there announced was reiterated in American Ice Co. v.

Cramer v. Mengerhausen

275 Or. 223 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1976

Thus in Powell v. … As explained in a case comment on Turk v. H. C.

Myers v. Strowbridge Estate Co.

82 Or. 29 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 10, 1916

Co. v. Pritz, 75 Or. 286 ( 146 Pac. 483 ); Schade v. Muller, 75 Or. 225 ( 146 Pac. 144 ); Norton v. Clark, 85 Me. 357 ( 27 Atl. *41 252 ); Miles v. Coutts, 20 Mont. 47 ( 49 Pac. 393 ); Hume v. … Brown, 91 U. S. 257 ( 23 L. Ed. 321 ); Springer Land Assn. v. Ford, 168 U. S. 513 ( 42 L. Ed. 562 , 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 170). The claimants did not waive their right to a lien on the premises.

Bennett v. City of Portland

124 Or. 691 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1928

Oliver v. Worcester, 102 Mass. 489 ( 3 Am. Rep. 485 ); Hill v. Boston, 122 Mass. 344 ( 23 Am. Rep. 332 ).” Worden v. New Bedford, 131 Mass. 23 ( 41 Am. Rep. 185 ); Haley v. Boston, 191 Mass. 291 ( 77 N. E. 888 , 5 L. R. … A. 652); 2 Shearman & Redfield on Negligence (6 ed.), § 267; Wahrman v. Board of Education, 187 N. Y. 331 ( 80 N. E. 192 , 116 Am. St. Rep. 609 , 10 Ann. Cas. 405). Haley v.

Austin v. Tillamook City

121 Or. 385 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 1927

Such acceptance is binding upon the property owners: Chance v. Portland, 26 Or. 286 (38 Pac. 68); Duniway v. Portland, 47 Or. 103, 113 ( 81 Pac. 945 ); Rubin v. Salem, 58 Or. 91, 96, 97 (112 Pac. 713); Hendry v. … J., and McBride and Brown, JJ., concur.

Westervelt v. Risley

108 Or. 652 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1923

The description set forth in the complaint complies with the certainty of description required in a deed: Bogard v. Barham, 52 Or. 121, 124 ( 96 Pac. 673 , 132 Am. St. Rep. 676 , 678). … Bean, Brown and Rand, JJ., concur.

Furgeson v. Jones

17 Or. 204 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1888

(Brown v. Basey, 3 Dall. 365 ; Dwarris on Statutes, 257.) … In Luppie v. Winans, 37 N. J.

E. Or. Mining Ass'n v. Dep't of Envtl. Quality

365 Or. 313 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2019

The explanation stated: "see also, Rybachek v. … See Kisor v. Wilkie , 588 U.S. ----, 139 S. Ct. 2400 , 2414-18, --- L.