Case law

Chamberlain v. City of Portland

184 Or. App. 487 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 23, 2002

That discussion of the issue disposes of plaintiff’s claim that WThisler did not occupy a position qualifying her for the privilege. … The cases, then, in harmony with well-established definitions of the term “officer,” demonstrate that sworn city police officers, under appropriate circumstances, qualify for the absolute privilege.

State v. Shevyakov

311 Or. App. 82 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 5, 2021

Both assignments of error are predicated on the same basic theory: that ORS 475.898 ren- dered him immune from prosecution for those crimes. … Here, the face of the information states an offense; defendant’s claim that he is entitled to immu- nity from the offenses charged does not mean that the facts alleged fail to establish a crime.

Board of Klamath County Commissioners v. Select County Employees

148 Or. App. 48 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 7, 1997

By the terms of the contract and the personnel manual, Engelhard is responsible for certifying that all new county employees are qualified and for terminating all county employees. … Magnuson, 282 Or 433, 437 , 578 P2d 1259 (1978) (characterizing such activities as “discretionary” for purposes of immunity from tort liability); see also Stevenson v.

Stone v. Finnerty

182 Or. App. 452 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 10, 2002

Rather, immunity under the statute is dependant on the nature of the “legal injury.” Id. … ‘Other jurisdictions have recognized that not all harms occasioned by the employment relationship qualify as compensable injuries under the Act.

Steamboaters v. Winchester Water Control District

69 Or. App. 596 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 5, 1984

It clearly specified the interests which were not to be impaired. … WPRB, by adopting temporary rules in another case — the Galesville Dam proceeding — but not in the present case has violated both the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution and the Equal Privileges and Immunities

State ex rel. Sopher v. Washington

233 Or. App. 228 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 20, 2010

Moreover, that amendment, by its terms, is not qualified in regard to whether such persons were convicted of aggravated murder committed when they were adults or when they were juveniles. See Engweiler v. … Relator contends that, contrary to the trial court’s understanding, he clearly was challenging, on numerous grounds, the board’s application of the rules to him.

State v. Hartman

5 Or. App. 156 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 1, 1971

It clearly arose from an independent origin. In Wong Sun v. … Such a distinction would allow an aura of protection to follow a prime suspect and immunize independent criminal actors engaged in offenses having no nexus with the crime previously committed by the focal suspect.

Toohey v. Aviation Adventures, LLC

269 Or. App. 416 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 4, 2015

One of those exceptions is “[i]f the negligence of [the coworker] is a substantial factor in causing the injury * * * and the negligence occurs outside of the capacity that qualifies the person for exemption under this section … causal link between Ketcheson’s employment and Toohey’s injury because (1) Ketcheson was not working for Wyndham while flying and (2) Ketcheson’s conduct in flying the plane was so unreasonable that a causal link cannot be established

In re the Marriage of Thompson

110 Or. App. 462 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 8, 1992

The rules shall establish the criteria and procedures for the initiation of proceedings to modify orders. … He concludes: “ORS 25.285 clearly denies equal application of the change of circumstances rule to individuals who owe, or are owed, child support payments.

Krieger v. Just

117 Or. App. 64 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 9, 1992

OTCA could not have waived an immunity that did not exist. … Had the legislature, in 1981, intended to impose the notice requirement as it did in 1977, it should have clearly said so. It did not, and we should not assume that it did.

Frye v. Public Employes Retirement System

67 Or. App. 617 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 11, 1984

statutes do not provide for return of contributions to a judge who has not qualified for benefits. … some rights to recover the contributions of judges who do not qualify for benefits.

Padrick v. Lyons

277 Or. App. 455 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 13, 2016

Summit held itself out to its clients as a qualified intermediary that would keep clients’ money while they concluded their qualifying 1031 transactions. … Schrock, 341 Or 338 , 142 P3d 1062 (2006), may be conduct subject to immunity.

Weaver v. Lane County

10 Or. App. 281 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 10, 1972

We agree that evidence clearly established that defendant Attig was engaged in the performance of discretionary functions here, and that he was immune from suit. … This cause of action is based on negligence and is an exception to the common-law immunity of a governmental body. Ogle v.

Lowrimore v. Dimmitt

99 Or. App. 192 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 25, 1989

ORS 820.300(2)(a) qualifies those privileges by imposing on the driver a duty to drive with due regard for the safety of others. … Whether it is the initial decision to begin the chase or a failure to discontinue the chase at some point, the pursuing officer’s decision is discretionary and, therefore, immune under the Oregon Tort Claims Act, even when

Guard Publishing Co. v. Lane County School District No. 4J

96 Or. App. 463 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 10, 1989

Such a file, with its evaluations, possible reprimands, etc., is clearly exempt from disclosure. … Because the addresses of replacement coaches do not constitute “personal information,” plaintiff argues, they do not qualify for the exemption.

Due-Donohue v. Beal

191 Or. App. 98 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 26, 2003

Thus, the language in those statutes clearly distinguishes between a “party in person” and an attorney. … instructing us that we may not “insert what has been omitted,” ORS 174.010, is frequently misapplied — after all, any explanation or paraphrase of a statute adds words to it — in cases like this where the drafters have clearly

Day v. City of Canby

143 Or. App. 341 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 4, 1996

The burden of establishing immunity is on the public body claiming it. Stevenson v. State of Oregon, 290 Or 3, 15 , 619 P2d 247 (1980). … Plaintiff argues that Mosley is “clearly distinguishable.”

Baillie v. State Board of Higher Education

79 Or. App. 705 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 4, 1986

Reversed and remanded for determination of whether petitioner meets the requirements of residence expressed in OAR 580-10-030(1). 1 In deciding who qualifies for resident tuition, the Board applies the following rules promulgated … OAR 580-10-025(4) provides, in pertinent part: “An emancipated student who establishes an Oregon residence as determined by rule 580-10-030 shall pay a nonresident fee unless: “(a) The student establishes Oregon residence

Mannex Corp. v. Bruns

250 Or. App. 50 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 16, 2012

To prevail, plaintiff must establish that the evidence in the summary judgment record would allow a reasonable *58 factfinder to find: (1) the making of a defamatory statement; (2) the “publication” of the defamatory material … A statement that is otherwise defamatory is privileged if it is uttered under such circumstances that the law grants immunity to the speaker. Wattenburg v. United Medical Lab., 269 Or 377, 379 , 525 P2d 113 (1974).

State v. Bergin

231 Or. App. 36 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 23, 2009

similar arguments from the state and the dissent, points out that the forensic evidence is “testimony against” the defendant, and that “there is not a third category of witnesses, helpful to the prosecution, but somehow immune … sample, or accuracy of the testing device, must appear in person as part of the prosecution’s case. * * * [Documents prepared in the regular course of equipment maintenance may well qualify as nontestimonial records.”