Case law

State Ex Rel. Jackson Creek Sand Co. v. Jackson County

147 Or. App. 577 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 30, 1997

At least part of the purpose of the Plan was to qualify for financial assistance in conducting forest practices on the property. … During the life of the mine, however, the primary focus will clearly be on gravel extraction and processing. The operation will not simply be auxiliary to the ultimate reforestation.

Hardtla v. City of Cannon Beach

183 Or. App. 219 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 7, 2002

Plaintiff asserts that, whichever of these two provisions applies, each clearly and objectively prohibited the city from approving defendants’ proposed structure, which was 912 square feet. … A land use regulation is an ordinance establishing standards for implementing a comprehensive plan. ORS 197.015(11).

State v. Smith

277 Or. App. 709 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 20, 2016

ORS 163.465(2)(b). 3 Thus, if either of defendant’s Oregon convictions was “for *** a crime described in ORS 163.355 to 163.445,” or if proof of the Nevada matter established a conviction for such a crime, defendant’s conduct … anything equivalent to one of the prohibited felonies in—in Oregon. * * * “The other two matters, however, are Oregon offenses, one from Multnomah County, one from Yamhill County, they include the indictment and the judgment clearly

State v. Guerrero

214 Or. App. 14 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 11, 2007

Atkinson, 298 Or 1 , 688 P2d 832 (1984), Oregon law has clearly distinguished between an inventory and a search. For that reason, we generally do not use the phrase “inventory search.” As we explained in State v. … Dinsmore, 182 Or App 505, 518-19 , 49 P3d 830 (2002). 2 We hasten to add that we do not assume that a Panasonic light scope necessarily would qualify as a ‘Valuable.”

Bruntz-Ferguson v. Liberty Mutual Ins.

310 Or. App. 618 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 14, 2021

Larson explains that, with respect to risks personal to the claimant, they are “so clearly personal that, even if they take effect while the employee is on the job, they could not possibly be attributed to the employment … Citing Larson, the Supreme Court has explained what may qualify as a neutral risk: “[E]xamples of neutral risks would be an employe[e], who while working, is hit by a stray bullet, bitten by a mad dog, struck by

Montoya v. Housing Authority of Portland

192 Or. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 10, 2004

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF PORTLAND, an Oregon nonprofit organization, Defendant, and Quantum Residential, Inc., dba Quantum Residential, an active Washington corporation, qualified to do business in Oregon, Appellant. 0007-07638 … The trial court denied Quantum's motion, ruling that it failed to establish sufficiently that it was entitled to relief based on its claim of excusable neglect.

State v. Vandyke

318 Or. App. 235 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 9, 2022

Snyder, 552 US at 477 (“On appeal, a trial court’s rul- ing on the issue of discriminatory intent must be sustained unless it is clearly erroneous.”). … We agree with the state that, under the standard established in Batson, and given our standard of review, the trial court did not err.

Smith v. State Department of Corrections

126 Or. App. 721 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 2, 1993

The Department’s argument is that, if we were to *731 find a contempt here, any inmate who had a case pending in the courts, no matter how frivolous, would be immune from an involuntary transfer. … Clearly, Smith is required to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the Department violated the statute.

Shelby v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

140 Or. App. 102 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 27, 1996

Davis concluded: “From this record as well as very clearly from the psychological testing, the single reasonable conclusion is that [petitioner] does present a severe emotional disturbance in the from of a personality disorder … Having made that concession, however, petitioner has failed to establish that all of those remedies are not available and constitutionally adequate.

Pfizer Inc. v. Oregon Department of Justice

254 Or. App. 144 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 19, 2012

that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury. … Thus, the Gibney declaration was legally sufficient to establish the availability of the “trade secrets” exemption.

State v. Crook County

242 Or. App. 580 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 11, 2011

As the parties have correctly noted, this case does not involve a land use decision as contemplated in ORS 197.090(2)(a)(A). 12 See ORS 195.305(7) (“A decision by a public entity that an owner qualifies for just compensation … Accordingly, DLCD’s Measure 37 waiver — one of the waivers that is at the heart of the vesting proceeding in this case — was clearly a matter within its statutory authority.

State v. Kini

305 Or. App. 833 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 12, 2020

It described the following explanation of that limitation as “[o]ne of the most clearly expressed”: “ ‘The principle which seems fairly deducible * * * is that a record of a primary fact made by a public officer in … The April 2016 hospital records admitted in this case do not fit within those boundaries established by Copeland.

State v. Parra-Sanchez

324 Or. App. 712 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 2023

Parra-Sanchez into the definition, as has Oregon, the qualifying conduct may have been narrowed. … What happened there was even though you could clearly see the genitals of the two girls on the computer that Mr.

State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Geist

97 Or. App. 10 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 1989

On de novo review, however, we conclude that the state established the allegations by clear and convincing evidence. First, the essence of the testimony of Dr. … Clearly, not only may we hear claims of ineffectiveness of counsel in termination cases; we have an obligation to provide a forum in which parents may vindicate fundamental constitutional rights.

State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. Marshall

13 Or. App. 239 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 9, 1973

It was positive and recommended the mother, the stepfather, their home and living conditions as fully qualified to have the custody of Teresa. (See Appendix.) … We think that the report of the Modesto County Welfare Department (see Appendix) clearly established that the conditions in the mother’s life and home were such that she was indeed both ready and *245 able to have Teresa

Miller v. CC Meisel Co., Inc.

183 Or. App. 148 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 7, 2002

It also acknowledged that, if plaintiff had filed a Us pendens notice, “he’d have statutory — assuming it’s filed in good faith and all that, he’d have statutory immunity!.]” … The Printing Industry court interpreted those statutes as prohibiting any changes from the jury’s verdict on the amount of damages, even if the law clearly allowed additional damages.

Boehnlein v. Ansco, Inc.

61 Or. App. 389 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 19, 1983

She will revoke her escrow instructions and immediately demand the return of all documents, and immediately attempt to sell the property to any other qualified buyer who meets her terms. … Because defendant’s brief clearly shows which “facts” came from the depositions, and because defendant made a good faith attempt to comply with the rule, we deny plaintiffs motion to strike the entire brief.

State v. Fox

262 Or. App. 473 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 23, 2014

On appeal, defendant argues that the state failed to establish that he was a “public servant.” … There was evidence in the record that, by virtue of his position as a recruiter for the Oregon National Guard, defendant qualified as a public servant.

Matteson v. LeafFilterNorth, LLC (A184754)

350 Or. App. 744 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2026

Those arguments and the evidence plaintiff points to in support of those claims do not establish a genuine issue of material fact as to whether LeafFilter was plaintiff’s employer. … Plaintiff did not otherwise produce evidence showing that defendants engaged in qualifying activities under the stat- ute.

In re the Marriage of Cheever

213 Or. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 20, 2007

The cases since Grove have established a series of considerations in such cases. … The “power” to reinstate pursuant to ORS 107.136 is, thus, contextually qualified and circumscribed.