Case law

Smith v. Brannan

152 Or. App. 505 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 18, 1998

Chester’s will established marital and residual trusts and gave Doris a general power of appointment over the assets of the marital trust. … Furthermore, we agree that applying the presumptive intent to the provision in Chester’s 1988 will would be contrary to his clearly expressed intentions.

Thunderbird Mobile Club, LLC v. City of Wilsonville

234 Or. App. 457 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 24, 2010

Plaintiff also alleged: “The adoption and threatened enforcement of the Ordinancefs] by the City of Wilsonville acting under color of law and ordinance, deprives the Plaintiff of its rights, privileges and immunities secured … A companion amendment amended Article IV, section 1, of the Oregon Constitution that “reserved” the initiative and referendum powers of voters for state laws to “further reserve[ ] to the qualified voters of each municipality

Sanders v. Vigor Fab, LLC

308 Or. App. 282 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 30, 2020

Consequently, Vigor Fab was, like Vigor Marine, immune from tort liabil- ity and plaintiff’s case was dismissed as barred by section 905 of the LHWCA. … The undisputed evidence in the summary judg- ment record before us establishes that Vigor Fab and Vigor Marine operations are sufficiently interrelated to meet the single entity test.

Meyer v. Bradbury

205 Or. App. 297 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 26, 2006

Instead, it would adhere to the more recent line of cases “as being more clearly reasoned and stating the correct rule.” Id. at 471 . … “Second, IP #8 would have the effect of amending Article IV, section 1 by establishing new hurdles for the Legislature to amend or enact laws related to campaign finance.

Lichau v. Baldwin

166 Or. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 5, 2000

The state never produced records establishing that petitioner took any leave or liberty during June 1989. … “This evidence clearly has a tendency to affect the result of the prosecution of the case.”

Bank of Oregon v. Independent News, Inc.

65 Or. App. 29 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 12, 1983

The trial court’s written order denying the motion was clearly predicated only on the substantive issue. … It noted: “As to providing a remedy for harm done by the impact of words as such, article I, section 8 does not immunize a speaker or writer against civil liability to another person ‘by due course of law for injury done

Neher v. Chartier

142 Or. App. 534 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 21, 1996

Instead, it clearly reveals that the action is against Tri-Met under the *539 doctrine of respondeat superior and against Chartier in his capacity as a Tri-Met bus driver, i.e., in his capacity as an employee of a public … Those amounts, as well as the total amount of $370,820.86, were within the limits established by ORS 30.270(1) (1989). There was no error. Affirmed on appeal and on cross-appeal.

State v. Beckner

303 Or. App. 744 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 29, 2020

Given the sequence of events, we begin with whether the evidence was sufficient to establish forcible compulsion by threat. Not all threats qualify for forcible compulsion. … Sullivan, 253 Or App 103, 107-08, 288 P3d 1004 (2012)¸ rev den, 354 Or 814 (2014), the statute requires a qualifying act of physical force or a qualifying threat.

Hobart v. Holt

222 Or. App. 550 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 8, 2008

There, the decedent, at the time of his death, would have been barred by immunity pertaining to workers’ compensation exclusivity, ORS 30.265(3), from maintaining a negligence-based action against the defendants. 334 Or at … It is not disputed that decedent was qualified under the Program.

Eugene Police Employees' Ass'n v. City of Eugene

157 Or. App. 341 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 25, 1998

By its terms, the OTCA establishes when the state and its subdivisions must expend public funds to address tort claims. … First, they encourage qualified persons to accept public employment. Second, they encourage the zealous execution of public functions, duties, and responsibilities.” Welker v.

State v. Albee

118 Or. App. 212 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 17, 1993

The equal privileges and immunities clause is also implicated when vague laws give unbridled discretion to judges and jurors to decide what is prohibited in a given case, for this results in the unequal application of criminal … We conclude, however, that defendant’s concerns about the general application of the statute are irrelevant to this case, because his conduct clearly comes within the statutory language.

State v. Laemoa

20 Or. App. 516 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 10, 1975

Defendant asserts that the evidence established neither. … The action element of the crime was not established because the state did not prove that the child was subject to a hazard of personal injury.

State v. Hollywood

67 Or. App. 546 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 11, 1984

The statements made by the child were clearly relevant — they established most of the requisite elements of the criminal offenses with which defendant was charged. … He argues that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to establish his guilt of rape and attempted rape.

Rinne v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd.

297 Or. App. 549 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 15, 2019

In exploring that issue, we note that, although neither the plain text of ORS 161.351(1) (2011) nor any case law of which we are aware establishes a nexus requirement, neither party advances an alternate reading of the statute … Roff later testified, however, that petitioner had stated "very clearly that he has no issue whatsoever" in participating in sex offender treatment outside the hospital and is "absolutely willing" to restart treatment in

Nacoste v. Halton Co.

275 Or. App. 600 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 23, 2015

Cheek replied: “Section 10 [enacted as ORS 656.267] clearly addresses the Johansen case, which established essentially that new medical conditions that arose related to an initial compen-sable injury, but were not part of … It *606 establishes the criteria for doing that. So, it does address the holding in the Johansen case squarely.”

Oregon Public Employees' Retirement Board v. Simat, Helliesen & Eichner

191 Or. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 21, 2004

In particular, Reinbold asserts that, because plaintiffs evidence was insufficient to establish the elements of common-law fraud, it was also, necessarily, insufficient to establish misrepresentation of tne sort required … However, shareholder immunity is not absolute.

State v. Holbrook

348 Or. App. 93 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 1, 2026

Thus, a reasonable juror could have found that the afternoon inci- dent was a qualifying contact. … In the context of defendant’s earlier behav- ior, his controlling statements, his unwanted physical intru- sion into D’s home and space on the morning of August 3, which I agree establish the first qualifying contact under

Alcutt v. Adams Family Food Services, Inc.

258 Or. App. 767 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 9, 2013

In support of its motion, defendant relied on the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers’ Compensation Law, ORS 656.018, asserting that it was “immune from liability on [plaintiffs] claims for relief’ under that statute … Plaintiff has clearly set it forth in paragraph 7 of his complaint that it’s necessary, in order to be here, for the worker to have failed to establish that a work-related incident was the major contributing cause of the

Gantenbein v. Public Employes' Retirement Board

33 Or. App. 309 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 3, 1978

Nine months later the plan was amended in such a fashion as to clearly exclude the plaintiff from *316 its scope. … by Oregon Laws 1969, ch 332, in order to establish whether it provided for a retirement benefit of 45 percent or 50 percent.

State v. Bainbridge

230 Or. App. 500 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 2, 2009

Before the trial court, defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish the elements of the offense. … The state also argues that, “[b]ecause some of the highway workers present in the highway work zone qualified as pedestrians, and because the record supports an inference that they controlled access to the zone, that area