Case law

Sunshine Dairy v. Peterson

183 Or. 305 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1948

Immediately following the four classes we find the only clause which mentions establishment of differentials in prices. … The words “said various services” clearly refer to the four classes, a, b, c, and d enumerated in the same sentence.

Aluminum Cooking Utensil Co. v. City of North Bend

210 Or. 412 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1957

intervention to restrain the enforcement of an alleged void penal statute, on the ground that it would injuriously affect his property rights, he must allege in his complaint that the business in which he is engaged is clearly … Section 20 of Article I of the Constitution of the State of Oregon provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, *427 upon the same terms, shall not equally

State v. Sunbeam Rebekah Lodge No. 180

169 Or. 253 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 5, 1942

The last will of James Eddie, executed June 12, 1931, was admitted to probate August 10, 1940; and the defendant Swayze, named in the will as executor thereof, was appointed as such executor and duly qualified. '■ The first … What was intended by the inexpertly written sections 2, 3 and 4, above quoted, is clearly shown by the statement of objects and purposes of Eebekah lodges set forth on page 7 of the Eebekah Lodge Eitual handbook, thus: “The

Franklin v. Northrup

107 Or. 537 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1923

In the nature of the case, the only evidence available either to corroborate or to rebut the testimony of plaintiff concerning- the value of the services rendered, consisted of the opinions of persons qualified to testify … Clearly, such opinion evidence is not within the mischief sought to be prevented by the statute.

Richardson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.

258 Or. 170 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1971

on acceptance, the court expressly found (at p 389) that “the very purpose of the agreement was the delivery of the seed to Eudy-Patrick for the purpose of testing,” for “unloading and testing,” and that “EudyPatrick was clearly … collection from Crone before delivery, so that in advance of payment Crone was not a party entitled to possession of the goods, whereas “in the present case Georgia-Pacific’s right to possession at the time of delivery was not qualified

Hartman v. Young

2 L.R.A. 596 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1888

The assumption or the argument is, that the box when returned to the vault duly relocked, but not reasealed, created such an opportunity for tampering as to invite outrage with almost perfect immunity against discovery; that … But the court say: “That the provisions of this section are merely directory, and that, where it is clearly and satisfactorily proved that the ballots have been kept intact and inviolate, in the same condition as when •counted

State v. Shields

280 Or. 471 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1977

be separately prosecuted for two or more offenses based upon the same criminal episode, if the several offenses are reasonably known to the appropriate prosecutor at the time of commencement of the first prosecution and establish … The court held that he could *481 not create an immunity to the murder charge by a guilty plea to the theft charge.

Delehant v. Board on Police Standards & Training

317 Or. 273 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1993

Although there is no specific provision in OAR 259-08-070(l)(a)(B) indicating that BPST — the promulgating agency — intended the rule to apply retroactively, the procedural history of this case clearly establishes such an … In this case, application of ORS 137.225(6)(b) to petitioner’s multiple convictions would have prevented him from qualifying for expunction of any of those convictions, had they occurred in Oregon.

State v. Green

128 Or. 49 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1928

The procedure to be followed by trial courts when confessions are offered in evidence was clearly and accurately stated by Mr. Justice Harris in a concurring opinion in State v. … It is a sacred principle that no one shall be compelled, or be induced under promise of immunity from punishment, to accuse himself.

Chance v. Weston

96 Or. 390 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 25, 1920

There are also limited fees; (1) qualified or base fees; (2) fees conditional at the common law.” Fee simple is defined in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary as: “An estate of inheritance. … Had the legislature intended to change the long-established rule entitling a husband to curtesy out of the wife’s equitable estate of inheritance, it would have been very easy to have expressed it thus.

Burnette v. Wahl

284 Or. 705 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1978

The doctrine of intrafamily tort immunity has been previously abandoned by this court with respect to intentional torts resulting in physical injuries. … If the legislature either provides for a civil remedy or clearly indicates that it means other provisions for enforcement to be complete and exclusive, there is nothing for a court to decide.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Farris

229 Or. 209 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1961

The record indicates clearly that both the trial committee and the Board of Governors at all times followed the procedure demanded by Section 25. This assignment of error is therefore dismissed. … The evidence indicates clearly that when the defendant gave Mr. Bristol the aforementioned sum of $20 he had no thought of being reimbursed by the Hjulstads.

Tharp v. Psychiatric Security Review Board

338 Or. 413 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 14, 2005

He referred to the Rogers insanity defense study and its list of diagnoses — including, among other things, drug and alcohol dependency — that qualified as ‘personality disorders.’ … Despite the foregoing evidence of legislative intent, the board insists that “[t]he legislative history does not. clearly express the legislative intent.”

Reed v. Reed

215 Or. 91 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1958

The words “any estate,” “devised” and “devisee,” as used in ORS 114.240, have apparently been accepted by bar and bench as so clearly including legacies and bequests that no one has ventured to suggest the contrary. … Moreover, it is a well-established rule that in the construction of statutes, words used in the statute which have a well-defined legal meaning are to be given that meaning. Cordon v.

Shumway v. Oregon State Peniten., Corr. Div.

294 Or. 462 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1983

Defendant also contends that the Disciplinary Committee failed to follow another rule which requires it to conduct an investigation upon an inmate's request. [2] Respondent argues that defendant did not clearly make such … , a fortiori, qualify in a probable cause setting. * * *" (Footnote omitted.) [3] The current rule revises a rule previously promulgated in 1973, 1976 and 1979.

Haney v. Neace-Stark Co.

109 Or. 93 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1923

It is in *124 cumbent upon him who would avail himself of the defense of former adjudication to establish it. … It was claimed in that case, as in this, that a dismissal in equity, without qualifying words, is a final decision on the merits. Mr.

Schoren v. Schoren

110 Or. 272 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1924

The above rule prevails in all other jurisdictions, except perhaps in a few where it is qualified by the statutory requirement that all stipulations shall be in writing. In Twitchell v. Risley, supra, Mr. … The record clearly establishes the contention of plaintiff that the decree from which defendant has attempted to appeal is a consent decree, from which no appeal can be taken.

Matter of Field

281 Or. 623 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1978

In all fairness to Judge Field, we find that some of the charges are inconsequential or the result of oversight, and others contain criticisms that could be addressed to any trial judge. 5 However, the evidence clearly shows … There were other cases where it appeared obvious that the defendant qualified for court-appointed counsel.

Jones v. Hoss

132 Or. 175 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1929

Words which have no well established technical or legal signification are to be given their plain, natural and ordinary meaning. A constitution is dependent upon ratification by the people. … The court clearly distinguished between personal and legislative expenses.

State v. Gaines

346 Or. 160 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 30, 2009

So understood, mere inaction, without more, would not seem to qualify. … So that, although, to establish a case of resistance, it must appear that the party was personally present and personally resisting, liability to the charge of obstructing may be established by showing that the party has