Case law

State Ex Rel. State Public Welfare Commission v. County Court of Malheur County

185 Or. 392 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1949

Lee Patterson are the duly appointed, qualified and acting members of the State Public Welfare Commission, and that J. H. Luihn is the duly elected chairman thereof. … A., Tit. 42, section 302, which set forth the conditions with which a state must comply in order to qualify for Federal funds.

McPherson v. Employment Division

285 Or. 541 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1979

Morgan, 15 Or App 454 , 516 P2d 495 (1973), clearly intended a binding statutory interpretation both in holding that wage discrimination based on sex is "good cause” to quit because it is an unlawful employment practice, … For instance, passages in the referee’s Conclusions and Reasons suggest an assumption that the grounds for leaving a job, to qualify as "good cause” under the statute, must be attributable to the employer.

Landis v. Wick

154 Or. 199 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 1, 1936

, unless plaintiff, before resting has relieved him by establishing it or supplying facts clearly presumptive of it. … The record contains positive testimony that those who looked in the direction of the bicycle saw it clearly.

Ashmun v. Nichols

92 Or. 223 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1919

Between actions clearly ex delicto and those as clearly ex contractu there exists *234 what has been termed, a border land, where the lines of distinction are shadowy and obscure, and the tort and the contract so approach … The record of the case in that matter was as follows: The witness, having qualified herself as being a nurse at the hospital, was asked: “Q.

Belleville v. Davis

262 Or. 387 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1972

We agree that plaintiff’s evidence was not sufficient to establish a “scheme” to defraud. … established that entirely innocent misrepresentation may be sufficient.

Lee v. Hoff

163 Or. 374 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1939

across diagonally, and have to be limited and qualified as to how it got over there.” … We are clearly satisfied that the above exception does not suffice as a basis for the plaintiff’s contention.

Oregon Telecommunications Ass'n v. Oregon Department of Transportation

341 Or. 418 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 5, 2006

To recover those expenses, ODOT established by rule a schedule of fees that it charged to plaintiff utilities. … This court interprets a constitutional provision adopted through the referral process by following the methodology established in Roseburg School Dist. v.

State v. Monaco

375 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 12, 2026

In that regard, we noted that the detectives “did not make any promise of immunity” and had explained that the defendant would be charged with murder no matter what he said. Id. at 32. … The Supreme Court disagreed, concluding that the Ohio Supreme Court’s opinion “shows clearly” that the construction given the statute was consistent with prior Ohio law and the statute’s legislative history. Id.

Hayden v. City of Astoria

84 Or. 205 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 1, 1917

These circumstances clearly entitle plaintiffs to recover on a quantum meruit for the reasons set. forth in the former opinion of this court. 3-5. … ’ ’ This question was objected to on the ground that the witness was not qualified.

Allianz Global Risks v. ACE Property & Casualty Ins. Co.

367 Or. 711 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 25, 2021

A third defense raised by the insurers is based on “qualified pollution exclusion” provisions in the policies. … THE POLLUTION EXCLUSIONS The final issue we must resolve involves the “qualified pollution exclusion” clauses found in certain of Freightliner’s insurance policies.

State v. Metcalf

129 Or. 577 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 7, 1929

"The Court: It is not my idea that they must take one of two or three qualifying words in the statute, but I think the question is pretty well settled by the opening statement of the district attorney. … Such an act is clearly within our Code definition of malice, which is: "The terms `malice' and `maliciously' when so employed, import a wish to vex, annoy or injure another person, established either by proof or presumption

Transportation Equip. Rent. v. OREGON AUTO. INS. CO

478 P.2d 620 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1970

The original complaint clearly stated a cause of action on the insurance binder. … Although it does not clearly appear from the opinion, the abstract of record in Yoshida discloses that the insurance proceeds had been paid into court.

Neal v. Davis

53 Or. 423 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1909

Does it clearly appear that it was his intention to provide for his children? Is it manifest upon the face of the will that his children were not overlooked or forgotten? Certainly not.” … These two classes are not necessarily identical, and, before they could be made so to appear, the fact would necessarily have to be alleged and then established by parol proof.

State v. Lyon

304 Or. 221 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1987

Like the Alaska Supreme Court in Pulakis, supra, at 479 , we concluded in Brown that “no judgment of polygraph testing’s validity or potential rate of error can be established based on available scientific evidence,” 297 … Defendant’s decision to testify was clearly voluntary and was not the result of any constitutionally proscribed police conduct. See State v. Sparklin, 296 Or 85 , 672 P2d 1182 (1983).

Menasha Corp. v. Crawford

332 Or. 404 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2001

Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993) (establishing that paradigm of statutory interpretation). … TTD benefits are not due and payable if the claim does not meet the qualifying statutory criteria.

State v. Autele

372 Or. 489 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 13, 2024

Whether the same right also exists under the par- allel provision of the Oregon Constitution—Article I, section 11—has not been as clearly established.3 Accordingly, defen- dant suggests that we could decide this case based … As we have explained, appellate review “is better facilitated by a record of findings that is direct, express, and clearly delineated.” Id. at 269.

McGanty v. Staudenraus

321 Or. 532 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1995

In reaching that conclusion, the court noted that “it would defy both reason and fairness to hold liable an employer who wrongfully discharges an employee but to immunize from liability an employer who, for equally improper … Because nothing in the complaint qualifies that allegation or makes it ambiguous, however, we have no occasion to construe plaintiffs admission. 4 The parties disagree about whether the plaintiff or the corporate-agent defendant

Dawson v. Payless for Drugs

248 Or. 334 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1967

The Second Restatement of the Law of Torts now states the rule in this qualified form. … The law is well established — and needs no citation of authority — to the effect that a person who needlessly encounters a known hazard is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

Northwest Natural Gas Co. v. City of Gresham

359 Or. 309 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 5, 2016

The utilities in this case all were operating without franchises, and the challenged fee qualified as a privilege tax. … Pursuant to those enactments, the city established a license fee of seven percent.

Taylor v. Olsen

282 Or. 343 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 16, 1978

The shift appears between section 363 of the 1934 Restatement of Torts, which qualified the general rule of nonliability to persons outside the land for natural conditions on the land only by a caveat "expressing no opinion … How would someone test a tree for rot that is not clearly visible? A Well, you either have to drill into it or chop into it. Q Now, by chopping into it you could just chop off the bark, perhaps?