Case law

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.

Weinstein v. Watson, Assessor

184 Or. 508 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1948

We are impressed with the contention that there-. by a well established administrative practice is shown to the effect that this provision of “the statute merely provides the mechanics for assessing and collecting taxes”, … The legislative interpretation thereof, as expressed in the titles of the amendatory acts, clearly indicates that the original section relates to exemptions of property!

Strandholm v. General Construction Co.

235 Or. 145 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1963

Plaintiff’s evidence could be said to establish that the use of a cotter key to secure the pin was inadequate and negligent. … My attention was momentarily diverted and I did not clearly understand the remark of the juror, but it was evidently clearly understood by the other jurors.

Scovell v. TRK Trans, Inc.

299 Or. 679 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1985

Lenhard, 227 Or. 242, 256 , 362 P.2d 312 (1961) (where right to sue is "a creation of the legislature," it is "clearly subject to legislative restrictions"). … Extinguishment should be treated as a fact essential to establish a settlor's right.

Ex parte Steiner

68 Or. 218 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1913

Lee Steiner, defendant above named, was at all times herein mentioned, and is now the duly appointed, qualified, and acting agent and superintendent of the Oregon State Hospital of the State of Oregon, and as such employs … clearly within both the spirit and letter of the law prohibiting it.

Kankkonen v. HENDRICKSON

232 Or. 49 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 6, 1962

The deceased had never married and left no one qualified to inherit his estate unless (1) it was his unwed mother and (2) she was living at the time of his death. … We have shown that it is this rule which the state seeks to invoke in its effort to establish that Johanna predeceased her son.

Valley & Siletz Railroad v. Thomas

151 Or. 80 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1935

And upon that question the complainant has the burden of proof and the court may not interfere with the exercise of the state’s authority unless confiscation is clearly established.” … Ct. 316 ), it is said: “This court does not sit as a board of revision with power to revieAv the action of administrative agencies upon grounds unrelated to the maintenance of constitutional immunities.

First National Bank v. Malady

242 Or. 353 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1966

The evidence in this respect was clearly for the jury. 4. … upon the defendant to establish his lien upon the premises, Clark v.

State v. Benoit

354 Or. 302 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 3, 2013

The trial court granted that motion, after concluding that the violation charge against defendant qualified as a “criminal prosecution” under Article I, section 11. … In a footnote, the court qualified those statements: 314 State v.

Bonner v. American Golf Corp. of California

372 Or. 814 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2024

It is defendants’ burden to establish that we must disavow our earlier cases. See State v. … In Fulmer, the court had found that the plaintiff had pleaded facts sufficient to establish a common-law claim for premises liability because, “it is well-established in Oregon that a proprietor’s obligation to make its premises

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Chase

339 Or. 452 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 27, 2005

See ORS 33.015(2) (listing acts, if done willfully, that qualify as “contempt of court”). … The accused testified that, for part of 2002, he took medication for his mental disability and that the medication was beneficial and helped him to think more clearly.

State v. Swank

99 Or. 571 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1921

Fraudulent intent in the making of a forged instrument is essential to the crime of forgery, though it is not necessary to prove it to establish the crime of uttering. … It was not questioned that Ford was qualified to testify as an expert. The defendant had a fair trial, and there is ample testimony to sustain the verdict. The judgment is affirmed. Affirmed. Rehearing Denied.

Paulson v. Western Life Insurance

292 Or. 38 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1981

This Iowa statute clearly influenced legislation in a number of other states. … Whether this provision can create an agency relationship that was not already officially established through the licensing process is a more difficult question.

Platt v. Newberg

104 Or. 148 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1922

The authorities reviewed establish that the provision of the Constitution upon which plaintiff relies (Section 10, Art. … I, Const.) has no application to a case which involves the sovereign privilege of the state and its subordinate agencies of immunity from private action.

University of Oregon Co-Operative Store v. Department of Revenue

273 Or. 539 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1975

“In the absence of judicial construction, administrative construction is informative, and unless clearly at variance with the express terms of the statute, is entitled to respect. * * *” 224 Or at 560 . … It will be noted that the regulation limits the exemption to corporations which offer “a regular course of instruction in an institution established for that purpose”.

State v. Clegg

332 Or. 432 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 23, 2001

Accordingly, those statements by Tina to Hughes are hearsay and are admissible only if they qualify under one of the exceptions to the hearsay rule. … The question thus becomes whether Tina’s statement to Hughes qualifies under one of the exceptions to which OEC 802 refers.

Houston v. Zahm

65 L.R.A. 799 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1904

Upon the other hand, the university was clearly not in a position to burden the land with an easement, having no estate therein to grant. … Whatever way we may turn the proposition, however, the agreement or covenant with reference to the establishment of the sixty foot highway to Spaulding Street was a mere personal covenant, wholly collateral to the land, and

Bernert v. Multnomah Lbr. & Box Co.

119 Or. 44 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 8, 1926

Under this qualified right, the stockholder, as stated in Wilson v. … But that there may be conditions and circumstances which would justify the corporation in refusing to permit an inspection is clearly recognized in Clawson v.

Knopp v. Griffin-Valade

372 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 1, 2024

The resolution of that dispute requires that we apply our well-established methodology to construe the text of the amendment, by determining how the voters who adopted the amendment most likely understood its text, including … They contend that the text clearly applies the disqualification to the term after the next term of office and is not capable of supporting the sec- retary’s interpretation.

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. City of Portland

149 Or. 581 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1935

Plaintiff contends that ordinance No. 61451 violates section 20, Article I of the state constitution, which provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, upon … It is too firmly established at the present day to admit of a doubt.