Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.54s
Wilson v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
230 Or. App. 248 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 29, 2009
App. 248 WILSON v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. July 29, 2009. Affirmed Without Opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMichael v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
221 Or. App. 383 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 16, 2008
App. 383 MICHAEL v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. No. A124434. Court of Appeals of Oregon. July 16, 2008. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDurham v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
226 Or. App. 604 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 19, 2009
App. 604 DURHAM v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. March 19, 2009. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedWier v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
226 Or. App. 604 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 19, 2009
App. 604 WIER v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. March 19, 2009. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedFox v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
221 Or. App. 177 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 19, 2008
App. 177 FOX v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. November 19, 2008. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMcClure v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
229 Or. App. 740 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 15, 2009
App. 740 McCLURE v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. A136574. Court of Appeals of Oregon. July 15, 2009. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGehring v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
229 Or. App. 236 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2009
App. 236 GEHRING v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. A132571 Court of Appeals of Oregon. June 17, 2009. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMcComas v. Employment Department
133 Or. App. 577 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 1995
Claimant contends that, notwithstanding any apparent lack of prejudice, the Board was required to enforce the statute strictly, rendering the department’s service ineffective, and its decisions nonfinal. 1 Brown v. … See Brown, 291 Or at 81 ; State v. Vandepoll, 118 Or App 193, 196-97 , 846 P2d 1174 , rev den 317 Or 163 (1993); Colson v. Bureau of Labor and hud., 113 Or App 106, 111-12 , 831 P2d 706 (1992).
Cited 4 timesPublishedSmith v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
217 Or. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 26, 2007
App. 411 Smith v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision. Court of Appeals of Oregon. December 26, 2007. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCleveland v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
221 Or. App. 383 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 16, 2008
App. 383 CLEVELAND v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. No. (A129318). Court of Appeals of Oregon. July 16, 2008. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRystedt v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
235 Or. App. 366 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 19, 2010
Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision Andy Simrin filed the opening brief for petitioner.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCullop v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
221 Or. App. 177 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 19, 2008
App. 177 CULLOP v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. November 19, 2008. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCorcoran v. Board of Examiners for Speech Pathology & Audiology
25 Or. App. 749 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 21, 1976
A similar argument was made in Board of Medical Examiners v. … State Board of Education, 233 Or 601, 605 , 378 P2d 558 , 96 ALR2d 529 (1963), citing Edison Co. v. Labor Board, 305 US 197 , 59 S Ct 206 , 83 L Ed 126 (1938).
Overruled by Scheurer v. Board of Examiners in Speech Pathology & Audiology, 31 Or. App. 935 (1977)Cited 3 timesPublishedOrtiz v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
209 Or. App. 378 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 22, 2006
App. 378 ORTIZ v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. November 22, 2006. Case affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGehring v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
209 Or. App. 378 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 22, 2006
App. 378 GEHRING v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. November 22, 2006. Case affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedAmbrose v. Board of Education of School District 17-C
51 Or. App. 621 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 13, 1981
Wallis v. Crook County School Dist., 13 Or App 174 , 509 P2d 44 (1973); Welo v. Dist. Sch. Bd., Dist. No. 7, 24 Or App 443 , 545 P2d 921 (1976). … The requirement of written notice is not waived by the employee’s actual knowledge of the board’s decision not to renew. Welo v. Dist. Sch. Bd., Dist. No. 7, supra.
Cited 3 timesPublished274 Or. App. 644 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 4, 2015
Arken v. City of Portland, 351 Or 113, 133 , 263 P3d 975 , adh’d to on recons sub nom Robinson v. Public Employees Retirement Board, 351 Or 404 , 268 P3d 567 (2011). … Oregonian Publishing Co. v. Board of Parole, 95 Or App 501, 505 , 769 P2d 795 (1989).
Cited 11 timesPublished298 Or. App. 283 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 19, 2019
statute "does not allow the Board to convert the circuit court's original consecutive sentences to concurrent sentences." … See, e.g. , Chernaik v. Brown , 295 Or. App. 584 , 601, 436 P.3d 26 (2019), rev. allowed , 364 Or. 849 , 442 P.3d 1119 (2019) ; Doe v. Medford School Dist. 549C , 232 Or.
Cited 2 timesPublishedWoodroffe v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION
213 Or. App. 588 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 20, 2007
App. 588 WOODROFFE v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION. Court of Appeals of Oregon. June 20, 2007. Affirmed without opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCentral Point School District No. 6 v. Employment Relations Board
27 Or. App. 285 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 8, 1976
Assn v. Sch. Dist, 24 Or App 751, 760 , 547 P2d 647 , 25 Or App 407 , 549 P2d 1141 , Sup Ct review denied (1976). … ORS 243.672(l)(g) provides: "It is an unfair labor practice for a public employer or its designated representative to * * * [v]iolate the provisions of any written contract with respect to employment relations including an
Cited 20 timesPublished
Ask Donna