Case law

State v. Wiltse

373 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 7, 2024

The Court of Appeals then considered whether the instruction “qualified for plain-error review.” Id. … It is the jury’s role to determine whether the state has carried that burden; the jury must find the facts that establish the elements of the crime. Boots, 315 Or at 592.

Springfield Utility Board v. Emerald People's Utility District

339 Or. 631 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 2005

The parties agree, as do we, that there is no question that the board qualifies as a “municipality” within the meaning of ORS 758.400(2) and, consequently, also qualifies as a “person” within the meaning of ORS 758.450(2) … qualifies as a “municipality’ that is excluded from the statutory term “public utility’ in that context.

Baker v. Keisling

312 Or. 385 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1991

Those requirements are clearly stated in the measure in section (3), albeit in general terms. The certified summary makes no reference to the requirement that the listed behaviors “are to be discouraged.” … Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens

Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc.

350 Or. 29 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 10, 2011

The court then examined whether plaintiffs had shown that they were in a “special relationship” with defendants that established a standard of care independent of the contract. … Mackenzie Engineering Inc., 324 Or 372, 376 , 927 P2d 86 (1996) (“ ‘[A] contract will not be construed to provide immunity from the consequences of a party’s own negligence unless that intention is clearly and unequivocally

State v. Wiltse

373 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 7, 2024

The Court of Appeals then considered whether the instruction “qualified for plain-error review.” Id. … It is the jury’s role to determine whether the state has carried that burden; the jury must find the facts that establish the elements of the crime. Boots, 315 Or at 592.

City of Pendleton v. Kerns

294 Or. 126 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1982

A local government does not immunize a land use decision from LUBA review merely through the expedience of attaching financing provisions. … The amended version of ORS 197.175(2), quoted in the text, illustrates more clearly the circularity of the definition of “land use decision.”

Pio v. Ross B. Hammond Co.

281 Or. 517 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 7, 1978

It is not clear, for instance, that the subcontracting clause is immune from attack merely because this union is the collective bargaining agent for the general contractor’s employees. … Deprived of the construction industry exemption, the agreement clearly violated section 8(e).

Raymond v. Flavel

27 Or. 219 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1895

It is doubtless true that, as a general proposition, express or continuing trusts, clearly established, do not come within the statute of limitations, for the reason, as *235 stated by Lord Redesdale (Hovendon v. … Loomis .of all trust relations, and a claim of absolute title and *240 ownership by her, of which Raymond clearly had knowledge.

State v. Anthony

179 Or. 282 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1946

Cas. 68, (prohibiting operation of crowded street cars) Notwithstanding the established rule that indefinite statutes are subject to condemnation under the 14th Amendment, it cannot be said that every statute containing broad … But enough has been said to indicate, first, that federal statutes as indefinite in their terms as the state statute now before us have been held immune to the condemnation of the due process clause; and, second, that if

State v. Guzman/Heckler

366 Or. 18 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 27, 2019

principle that “[w]hen a statute has been construed by the court of last resort of the state and is later re- enacted, it is deemed that the Legislature has adopted the court’s construction unless the contrary purpose is clearly … Cite as 366 Or 18 (2019) 47 significant to prevent it from qualifying as a statutory coun- terpart.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Fadeley

342 Or. 403 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 23, 2007

An active emeritus attorney qualifies as an “attorney” under BR 1.1(c). … In determining the appropriate sanction, we follow our well-established methodology.

Bohlman v. Coffin

4 Or. 313 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1873

He acts under oath and is presumed to be qualified to discharge his office conscientiously, and it cannot be presumed that the copy he has returned is not a true copy. … No equitable doctrine is better established than that laid down by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke in Le Neve v. Le Neve (2 Ldg.

Salter v. Salter, Adm.

209 Or. 536 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1957

On 24 March 1952 the contestant was appointed administrator and he qualified as such. … The presumption in this case is supported by evidence and is firmly established by the decisions of this court. Flanders v.

Williams v. Barbee

165 Or. 260 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 12, 1940

We think, however, that the proofs clearly establish that the land was not in the actual possession of the defendant, Spiess, or of any one else, and, hence, that the court had jurisdiction to proceed. … entitled to the aid of a court of equity on well-established principles.”

Oregon-Columbia Chapter AGC v. ODOT (S071452)

373 Or. 405 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 10, 2025

The stated purpose of that CWA was to provide “additional terms and conditions for certain ODOT public improvement projects that qualify as ‘Covered Projects’ ” as defined in the CWA. … “Most public contracts, for example, are exempt from rulemaking procedures [under ORS 183.335(10)], even if they contain terms that otherwise qualify as ‘rules.’ ” Homestyle Direct, LLC v.

Tenny & McKenzie v. Mulvaney & Bemis

9 Or. 405 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1881

But whatever distinctions should properly be made as to the respective meanings of the words used in this instance, we think it was clearly competent to show by the witness that the logs in controversy were of the quality … produced at the trial, and had testified that the measurements were correctly made, and truly entered in the “• scale-book,” and had shown by their testimony at the trial sufficient recollection of the previous transaction to qualify

Love v. Walker

59 Or. 95 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 25, 1911

The date appointed for final distribution establishes for the contingency of his dying without issue a boundary beyond which it can have no effect. … The only answer is: To those at that time qualified under the will. If Green C.

State v. Manzella

306 Or. 303 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 26, 1988

A majority of the Court of Appeals, sitting in banc, found sufficient evidence to establish that element. … The sole question remaining is whether any of this *315 defendant’s declarations qualify as “admissions” rather than “confessions.”

Ochoco Construction, Inc. v. Department of Land Conservation & Development

295 Or. 422 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 26, 1983

The *433 definition of “person,” as quoted above, clearly contemplates a governmental agency, such as the Department, petitioning LUBA for review of a quasi-judicial decision. … Although three alternative means of qualifying for LUBA review are available to the “person” who appeared before the quasi-judicial decision-maker, the Department here chose to allege before LUBA that it was both “adversely

Wied v. Marion County

275 Or. 711 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1976

This language clearly contemplates an appeal by the employer in certain circumstances. … Although the Commission may be well qualified to pass upon matters entrusted to its authority, the courts are sing *720 ularly equipped to interpret the law to determine what that authority is.