Case law

Alder Slope Ditch Co. v. Moonshine Ditch Co.

90 Or. 385 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1918

corporation, even if considered as the act of a promoter, was ratified by the corporation by following up said notice by the construction of an irrigation system and user of water therein, and their claim before the water board … S.) 825); Leavengood v. McGee, 50 Or. 233 ( 91 Pac. 453 ); Brown v. Webb, 60 Or. 526 ( 120 Pac. 387 ).

Columbia River-Longview Bridge Co. v. Wellington

140 Or. 413 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1932

From Swensen v. … J., Brown, Band, Belt, Campbell and Kelly, JJ., concur.

T.D.F. v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

363 Or. 104 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 24, 2018

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Smith

318 Or. 47 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1993

PP&L, 302 Or 256, 269 , 729 P2d 552 (1986) (quoting Oregon Business Planning Council v. … However, In re Brown no longer is useful in interpreting DR 7-102.

In Re Brown's Estate

165 Or. 575 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1940

O’Neill did not see fit to point out and show wherein this transaction was fair and above board. … Battiest, 79 Okla. 248 , 192 P. 575 ; McQueen v. Wilson, 131 Ala. 606 , 31 So. 94 ; Weston v. Teufel, 213 Ill. 291 , 72 N. E. 908 . See note 66 A. L. R. 244; Alexander’s Commentaries on Wills, Vol.

Twohy Bros. v. Ochoco Irrigation District

108 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1922

Pioneer Irrigation District v. Walker, 20 Idaho, 605 ( 119 Pac. 304 ); Ferbrache v. Drainage Dist. No. 5, 23 Idaho, 85 ( 128 Pac. 553 , Ann. Cas. 1915C, 43, 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 538; Brown Bros. v. Columbia Irr. … In Brown Bros. v. Columbia Irr. Dist., supra, it was held that an irrigation district is a municipal corporation within the meaning of the statute relative to taking a bond for public works. In the case of Peters v.

Jacobberger v. School District No. 1

122 Or. 124 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1927

Lord Campbell said in Hochester v. … J., and Brown and Coshow, JJ., concur.

Cameron v. DeBoard

230 Or. 411 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1962

E.g., Local No. 658 v. Brown Shoe Co., 403 Ill 484, 87 NE2d 625 (1949); Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Board, 219 Md 146, 148 A2d 403 (1959); Rusynko Unempl. Compensation Case [Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Unemployment Comp. … See Local No. 658 v. Brown Shoe Co., 403 Ill 484, 87 NE2d 625 (1949), and Shell Oil Co. v. Cummins, 7 Ill2d 329, 131 NE2d 64 (1955).

State v. McPherson

77 Or. 151 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1915

Portland General Electric Co., 52 Or. 502 ( 95 Pac. 722 , 98 Pac. 160 ); 36 Cyc. 1022, and note 99; State v. Brown, 41 La. Ann. 771 ( 6 South. 638 ); Miller v. Hurford, 13 Neb. 13 ( 12 N. W. 832 ). … As said in Manning v.

State v. Johnson

7 Or. 210 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1879

Archie Brown, just now decided. … In the case of The People v.

Snow v. Reed

14 Or. 342 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 4, 1887

The appellant’s counsel also claimed that the president of the board called the meeting at which the said charge was investigated without notifying commissioner Brown thereof. … Strahan, J., concurs in the result, upon the principles announced in Wood v. Riddle, decided at this term.

Pacific Building v. State Tax Commission

241 Or. 525 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1965

The Marion County Board of Equalization fixed the true cash value of plaintiffs’ real property at $348,000. The defendant Commission affirmed. … See Brown v. Siemens, 117 Or 583, 590 , 245 P 510 (1926), on the effect of a demurrer.

Perkins v. Marion County

252 Or. 313 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1968

Dennis et ux v. City of Oswego et al, 223 Or 60 , 353 P2d 1044 (1960); Shaffner et al v. City of Salem et al, 201 Or 45 , 268 P2d 599 (1954). It was held in Page et ux v. … In the quotation from Page v.

Woodtek, Inc. v. Musulin

263 Or. 644 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1972

Plaintiff relies on Brown v. Hassenstab, 212 Or *654 246, 319 P2d 929 (1957). … Brown v. Hassenstab, supra; 2 Restatement, Contracts § 470, Comment a. Plaintiff’s final assignment of error concerns the trial court’s failure to award relief in addition to rescission.

State of Oregon v. Cahill

208 Or. 538 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1956

The same reasoning was applied in People v. Hill, 2 Cal App2d 141, 37 P2d 849 . And see, People v. Meadows, 199 NY 1 , 92 NE 128 ; Brown v. Christman, 126 F2d 625; American Surety Co. of New York v. … Greenwald, 223 Minn 37, 25 NW2d 681 ; Dunlop Sand & Gravel Corp. v. Hospelhorn, 172 Md 279, 191 A 701; Tate v. Emery, 139 Or 214 , 9 P2d 136 ; State v. Browning, 47 Or 470 , 82 P 955 ; Jansen v.

White v. City of Seaside

107 Or. 330 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 1, 1923

Co. v. Ochoco Irr. Dist., June 12, 1923 ( 210 Pac. 873 ). This provision of the charter is mandatory. … Brown and Band, JJ., concur.

Young v. Gard

129 Or. 534 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1929

Justice Brown in Twohy Brothers v. Ochoco Irr. … J., and Brown and Belt, JJ., concur.

Cooper v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

364 Or. 723 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 18, 2019

Gray v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

363 Or. 104 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 24, 2018

Norwood v. Eastern Oregon Land Co.

112 Or. 106 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1924

v. … The acts of the defendant, pretending to rely upon a void order of ’the water board, amounts to a continued trespass which equity is authorized to enjoin: Chapman v. Dean, 58 Or. 476 ( 115 Pac. 154 ); Stotts v.