Case law

Tahvili v. Washington Mutual Bank

224 Or. App. 96 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 26, 2008

That rule was originally adopted by the Oregon Supreme Court in 1990 “to assure that out-of-state counsel are qualified to practice before Oregon courts.” … Those circumstances alone established “good cause shown” for revocation of McCullough’s pro hac vice status.

Strome v. Strome

185 Or. App. 525 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 8, 2003

In doing so, we take some guidance from Hruby and Hruby, 304 Or 500 , 748 P2d 57 (1987), which governed custody disputes between biological parents and qualifying nonparents before Sleeper and established a standard not unlike … Unquestionably, grandmother has played a significant role in establishing such stability.

Fresk v. Kraemer

185 Or. App. 582 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 8, 2003

Because the sum of those costs and fees plus the jury’s damages award exceeded the arbitrator’s award, the court clearly determined that plaintiff was also entitled to fees reasonably incurred in the circuit court proceedings … Under any of these scenarios, the defendant’s risk of financial loss is substantially increased and the symmetry established by ORS 20.080 is destroyed.”

State v. Ayers

207 Or. App. 668 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 13, 2006

We are unaware of any rule that requires us to confer immunity upon a person for his crimes in Oregon when his criminal activities in other states serve to prevent a speedy trial in this state.” … Johnson, 339 Or 69 , 116 P3d 879 (2005), clearly indicate otherwise. 11 Washington had enacted the IAD in 1967.

Employers-Shopmens Local 516 Pension Trust v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. of America

235 Or. App. 573 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 16, 2010

Accordingly, defendants reasoned that “the very same regulations [plaintiffs] ask[ ] this Court to incorporate into the * * * [p]olicies to override the policy language establish that there is no coverage in any event.” … Although the general definition of “employee” clearly excludes coverage for the named insured’s trustees and directors, see 235 Or App at 577 n 3, the endorsement clearly provides coverage for such persons to the extent that

NW Environ. Advocates v. DEQ

349 Or. App. 17 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 29, 2026

In the order, EQC clearly weighs the compet- ing expert opinions and finds that NWEA “did not present sufficient evidence to overcome DEQ’s use of the 6:1 total nitrogen-total phosphorus ratio to adjust the target phospho … NWEA argues that Annear was not qualified to give expert opinion testimony on the relationship between nutrients and algal growth, including whether the permit’s nutrient limits will achieve compliance with the biocriteria

Ramsey v. Taylor

166 Or. App. 241 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 2000

Evidence in the record establishes not only that Taylor and Senior spent most of their time together in the last few months of his life but also establishes that Taylor took increasing responsibility over that time in managing … Clearly, Senior felt he was entitled to more attention and respect from his family, as shown by his numerous comments to others.

Eden Gate v. D & L Excavating & Trucking

178 Or. App. 610 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 9, 2002

Clearly, the purpose of the contract is to bring the property into compliance with DEQ regulations. … In general, a decision that one party does not qualify for a declaratory judgment stating a conclusion does not invariably imply that the opposite conclusion has been proved.

Vavrosky Maccoll Olson Busch & Pfeifer PC v. Employment Department

212 Or. App. 174 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 18, 2007

In other words, ORS 657.471 establishes a presumption in favor of charging employers, subject only to limited exceptions. … ORS 9.160(1) provides: “Except as provided in this section, a person may not practice law or represent that person as qualified to practice law unless that person is an active member of the Oregon State Bar.”

State v. Civil

283 Or. App. 395 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 11, 2017

The prosecutor explicitly referred to Cox, describing its facts, and concluded: “I think [the circumstances in Cox] are clearly analogous to this. … One might reasonably wonder why—as a matter of structure and syntax—if the legislature intended subsections (l)(b) and (l)(c) to function as qualified exceptions to an omnibus prohibition in subsection (l)(a), it did not

Harris v. WARREN FAMILY PROPERTIES, LLC.

207 Or. App. 732 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 20, 2006

We first note that consideration of dictionary definitions does not establish a definite meaning for “original condition.” … Thus, the integration clause clearly conveys that any inconsistent -understanding of the parties under the preceding leases does not survive execution of the 2000 Leases.

State v. Buffum

166 Or. App. 552 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 19, 2000

Most importantly, ORS 426.100(3) provides for the right to representation by and appointment of qualified counsel—a right that is virtually more difficult to waive than is the corresponding right of defendants in criminal … The applicable statutes clearly establish the issues at an involuntary mental commitment proceeding: before it may involuntarily commit a person, the trial court must find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person

Department of Human Services v. C. M. K.

270 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 25, 2015

See ORS 419B.504 (establishing grounds for terminating parental rights for unfitness). … In support, mother relies on three cases in which we concluded that a “risk of relapse” failed to qualify as unfitness under ORS 419B.504. See State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. D. F.

State v. Matheson

220 Or. App. 397 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 11, 2008

To qualify as “plain,” an error must (1) be one of law; (2) be obvious — that is, not reasonably in dispute; and (3) appear on the face of the record, such that we need not go outside the record or choose between competing … Hall, 327 Or 568, 574 , 966 P2d 208 (1998) (if the evidence supports multiple reasonable inferences, it is for the trier of fact to decide which inference to draw and whether that inference establishes the ultimate fact in

In the Matter of Rudder and Rudder

230 Or. App. 437 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 26, 2009

The marital asset portions of those accounts were to be divided by a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO). (5) The balance of the parties’ assets was divided roughly evenly, and wife was awarded an equalizing judgment … In sum, the text of the statute clearly supports husband’s reading of the statute. The legislative history confirms that understanding.

Cunningham v. Thompson

188 Or. App. 289 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 12, 2003

According to the state, nothing about the status of Cochran’s license at the relevant time suggested that he was not a qualified expert, and his ‘self-described efforts to keep dangerous criminals locked up would almost certainly … Cochran also believed that there was a “sadistic component,” a “prevalent pattern he has of using physical cruelty or violence towards others for establishing dominance and getting other people to be scared of him” and that

Prentice v. Land Conservation & Development Commission

71 Or. App. 394 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 19, 1984

There are no findings that the land could not qualify for tax-deferred status or explaining why it has not been placed in that status. … The exact nature and extent of the areas found to be irrevocably committed shall be clearly set forth in the justification for the exception, and those area(s) must be shown on a map or otherwise described and keyed to the

In re Staveland

295 Or. App. 210 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 5, 2018

The appraiser then qualified that estimate, explaining that, although the estimated range as of December 2015 was "an indication" of what the house could be worth, that figure was less reliable than a true appraisal. … "But it was clearly both of your decisions that because of the tax consequences that you understood would occur if you married, and you both decided that what you would do is get married but for the paperwork, but for the

Mitchell v. Mt. Hood Meadows Oreg.

195 Or. App. 431 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 6, 2004

In fact, Brady testified at trial that the quantitative test of plaintiffs urine “clearly * * * does not” measure how much of the active ingredient was ever present. … That argument clearly raises the issue whether the trial court ruled correctly under ORCP 64 B(4).

Hamilton and Hamilton

350 Or. App. 759 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2026

In addition, Husband is currently qualified for higher paying jobs with no further training. … that the court improp- erly determined that his earning potential was higher than his salary due to his crypto currency investments presents a close question but we conclude that the court did not err because (1) the court clearly