Case law

Bob Godfrey Pontiac, Inc. v. Roloff

291 Or. 318 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1981

The issue presented in this case is clearly one in which there is no underlying common law cause of action. … All three cases are clearly distinguishable, however.

US Bank of Portland v. Snodgrass

202 Or. 530 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1954

As early as 1853 our legislature conferred upon every person of qualified age and sound mind the right to devise and bequeath all his estate, real and personal, saving such as is specially reserved by law to the decedent’ … to a church thus established of the right to worship according to the dictates of their own conscience.

Jackson v. Nicolai-Neppach Co.

219 Or. 560 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1959

Herbert Jackson had assigned one share of his stock to his wife, Eva, in order to qualify her as a director. … The shareholder deadlock provisions of the Illinois Business Corporation Act, of the Model Business Corporation Act, and of the Oregon Business Corporation Law are clearly couched in language of permission.

Carter v. Moberly

263 Or. 193 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 19, 1972

. * * * "However, this cannot be the meaning of the term `discretion' when a judge is faced with a decision whether to admit certain testimony of an expert after he has been deemed qualified. … Dahl, 95 Or.Adv.Sh. 527, 531, 499 P.2d 1316, 1318 (1972) we said: "These various facts may not have been sufficient to require a finding by the trial court that the statement in question did not qualify as an `excited utterance

In Re Bernard Jolles

235 Or. 262 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1963

In my opinion this is an act which clearly shows a lack of moral stamina. … The fact that one guilty of misconduct which would clearly disqualify him for admission to the Bar may establish that he has subsequently had a clean record for several years would not necessarily justify this court in concluding

In Re Complaint as to Conduct of Devers

328 Or. 230 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1999

In sum, the record does not establish that the accused was indigent. … Disbarment clearly could be an appropriate sanction in this case. To determine whether that sanction should be imposed, we consider aggravating and mitigating factors. D.

Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v. Hudson

190 Or. 458 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1951

To give a discount for cash payments is a long-established mercantile practice. The manufacturer allows such discount to the jobber and wholesaler, and the jobber and wholesaler, to the retailer. … The use of these general words at the end of the definition was clearly intended to explain and qualify the meaning to be given the specific terms immediately preceding.

Stanley v. Mueller

222 Or. 194 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1960

Aside from the fact that appellants failed to prove the existence of such agreement, the record clearly contradicts that they ever entertained such in *206 tention. … Furthermore, there was not sufficient conduct establishing part performance to take the case out of the statute. It follows that Mrs.

Arken v. City of Portland

351 Or. 113 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 6, 2011

The "revised" allowance 18 reduced the 1999 earnings credit to 11.33 percent, but continued to provide COLAs. 19 In Section 10, the legislature clearly and expressly tied the availability of 20 the … We conclude, based on statutory text and context, 14 that the earnings credit allocation error also qualifies as a benefit calculation 15 methodological error. 16 2.

State Land Board v. Rogers

219 Or. 233 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1959

When we read § 61-107, OCLA, supra, we find that the right to receive by payment in the United States or its territories is not there qualified as a reciprocal right as is the right to take by inheritance. … It is clearly stated that the right of nonresident aliens to take or inherit depends “upon the [further] right of citizens of the United States to receive, by payment to them within the United States, or its territories,

In re the Review of Chapter 482, Oregon Laws, 1961

228 Or. 562 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1961

The constitution clearly demands that “the number of senators and representatives for each county or district shall be determined by dividing the total population of such county or district by such respective ratios,” (i.e … Original jurisdiction is conferred upon this court by virtue of Article IV, 5 6 (2) (a), which, reads as follows: “Original jurisdiction hereby is vested in the Supreme Court upon the petition of any qualified elector of

McKee Electric Co. v. Carson Oil Co.

301 Or. 339 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1986

They should be given only where a general instruction would clearly be inadequate or would confuse or mislead the jury.’ * * * “ ‘Proposed instructions advising the jury that it may or should consider certain specific evidence … What this means is that in the ordinary malpractice case laymen are not qualified to say that a good doctor would not go wrong, and that it is only where there is expert testimony that proper skill and care would have done

Westerman v. Oregon Automobile Credit Corp.

168 Or. 216 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 13, 1942

Both of these cases were clearly distinguishable. In the case of Texas Auto Co. v. … Undisputed evidence establishes that the plaintiff was himself the aggressor when he pushed himself in the car and pushed the defendant’s assistant out of it.

Allen v. Hall

328 Or. 276 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1999

Although the testamentary intent rule clearly is controlling in a will contest, it does not follow that the rule must be followed in the tort context. … It follows that, for purposes of the first element of that tort, as extended, a clear prospect of an inheritance can qualify as a protected economic relationship.

Wold v. City of Portland

166 Or. 455 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1941

In making provision for meeting the deficit, the ordinance clearly shows that this function of the city is not contemplated as a source of revenue. … A.), intended to abolish the immunity of a municipal corporation from liability for the negligence of its officers and employes while performing governmental functions. In Rapp v.

Elliff v. Oregon R. & N. Co.

53 Or. 66 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1909

Thus, where the carelessness of a third person co-operates with the neglect of the master, in causing an injury, the *76 act of such person affords no immunity to the employer, if the hurt would not have occurred except for … The averment, referred to in the complaint,, is adequate to rebut any inference which might arise that, in seeking employment, the plaintiff impliedly represented that he was qualified to perform any service which might be

Lawrey v. Sterling

41 Or. 518 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1902

Caviness, and represents that he is the duly qualified and acting administrator of the estate of M. … Caviness, being first duly sworn, say that I am the duly appointed, qualified, and acting administrator of the estate of M.

State Ex Rel. State Office for Services to Children & Families v. Stillman

333 Or. 135 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 20, 2001

The question is, however: Do the sequellae of a parent’s criminal acts, such as flight, concealment, or incarceration, also qualify as “criminal conduct” under ORS 419B.504(6)? That depends. … That clearly placed father in an untenable position. This court took the opposite view of similar behavior in State v.

Anderson v. Peden

284 Or. 313 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1978

Urban growth boundaries shall be established to identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land. … Any urban growth boundary established prior to January 1, 1975 which includes rural lands that have not been built upon shall be reviewed by the governing body, utilizing the same factors applicable to the establishment or

State Land Board v. Brownell

199 Or. 448 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1953

The case is clearly distinguishable. In Thramm’s Estate, 80 Cal App2d 756, 183 P2d 97 , the critical date was 7 July 1943. … They established merely presumptive heirship.