Case law

Shelter Forest International Acquisition, Inc. v. COSCO Shipping (USA) Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 6, 2021

M/V Capitan Constante, 790 F.2d 280, 281-82 (2d Cir. 1986) (clause calling for freight “to be payable without discount on delivery . . . clearly expressed [the parties’] intent [that the shipper] would not be able to evade … engaged in unwise “hardball-type business decisions”); Yang Ming, 259 F.3d at 1093 (carrier entitled to demurrage under its tariff from when free time lapsed until the cargo was abandoned; the following period did not qualify

Northwest Environmental Advocates v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 20, 2024

EPA argues that the demonstratives do not qualify as summaries under Federal Rule of Evidence 1006 and that they are not accurate summaries or charts. EPA Mot. 35. … The Ninth Circuit held that because California had completed some TMDLs and established a schedule for completing the rest, the state had not “clearly and unambiguously decided not to submit any TMDL[s].”

Boulton v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 29, 2021

“An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Id. … Washington, 350 F.3d 925, 929-30 (9th Cir. 2003) (declining to address an argument not clearly raised in the appellant’s brief).

Student

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 12, 2026

Under a strict textual interpretation, possibly any length of “removal” would qualify. … Third, Student’s effect on teachers and students in the regular classroom is clearly deleterious.

Hall v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 22, 2022

Second, the plaintiff must establish that the injury they suffered was foreseeable. Martinez, 943 F.3d at 1271. … But DeShaney has clearly foreclosed these claims.”).

Meza Mendoza v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 28, 2020

‘“Substantial evidence’ means ‘more than a mere scintilla but less than a preponderance,’ or more clearly stated, ‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’” … See SSR 96–8p; Carmickle, 533 F.3d at 1161–62 (holding that when the record does not establish that the claimant held himself out for full-time work, receipt of unemployment benefits is not a basis for discrediting his

Brunn v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 12, 2020

The ALJ did not clearly state how Dr. … This error, on its own, would require further fact finding regarding whether there are jobs available in the national economy for which she is qualified.

Shita v. Taylor

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 14, 2025

Therefore, plaintiff must establish that diversity jurisdiction exists. However, plaintiff alleges that both he and defendant reside in Oregon. Am. Compl. ¶¶ 6-7. … A court may issue an ex parte temporary restraining order without notice to the adverse party only if "specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or

Dickerson v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 16, 2020

Grant, 796 F.2d 288, 290 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding that “a police officer has immunity if he arrests with probable cause”); Cabrera v. … “It is well-established that a ‘person may not be arrested, or must be released from arrest, if previously established probable cause has dissipated.’” Nicholson v.

Sim

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 14, 2025

Corbett’s opinion did not qualify as a medical opinion. (See Pl.’s Reply at 2, ECF No. 16.) … [The] neuropsychological examination and opinion is a medical opinion, and clearly relevant to Plaintiff’s mental functional abilities.” (first citing 20 C.F.R. § 416.920(3); then citing 20 C.F.R.

Burge ex rel. Burge v. Colton School District 53

100 F. Supp. 3d 1057 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 17, 2015

Granting discretion to the employee does not automatically immunize the municipal entity from a § 1983 claim. Therefore, CSD’s motion for summary judgment based on Monell should be denied. II. … Given the comments responding to his post, the answer is clearly no. See Watts v.

Basl v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 24, 2021

Here, for example, Plaintiff told one examiner that he “frequently rides a skateboard,” and then later qualified his statement to “days he is not too unbalanced to do so.” Tr. 432. … It is well-established that an ALJ must consider testimony from lay witnesses submitted on behalf of a claimant. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.929(c)(3), 416.945(a)(3).

LaVia v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 4, 2025

Against that backdrop, even though Plaintiff clearly interprets the evidence differently, he has not (and cannot) establish error by simply advancing a different interpretation of the medical evidence. … “An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Id.

In Re Farmers Insurance Exchange Claims Representatives' Overtime Pay Litigation

336 F. Supp. 2d 1077 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 26, 2004

The CR must evaluate all other coverage issues, however, such as whether the cause of loss is covered or excluded under the policy, whether a person qualifies as an “insured” under the policy, whether the subject of the loss … The evidence clearly demonstrated that FIE management and supervisors largely ignored any enforcement of this “policy.”

Beber v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 12, 2019

Redner also found Plaintiff's "psychotic symptoms, attentional problems, and behavioral disturbances clearly began long before any substance abuse." Tr. 801. … and the objectives of the credit-as-true rule foreclose the argument that a remand for the purposes of allowing the ALJ to have a mulligan qualifies

Cheshire v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 18, 2024

Because plaintiff did not establish presumptive disability at step three, the ALJ continued to evaluate how her impairments affected her ability to work. … Against that backdrop, even though plaintiff clearly interprets the evidence differently, she has not (and cannot) establish error by simply advancing a different interpretation of the medical evidence.

Shaner v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 3, 2024

‘“Substantial evidence’ means ‘more than a mere scintilla but less than a preponderance,’ or more clearly stated, ‘such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’” … Plaintiff's step-one arguments therefore do not establish harmful error.”).

Juliana v. United States

217 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 10, 2016

the issue to a coordinate political department; [ (2) ] a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; [ (3) ] the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly … Congress had the power to decline to recognize a foreign state the Executive had decided to recognize, the president would be unable to assure that foreign state that its ambassadors would be received, its officials would be immune

Karthauser v. Columbia 9-1-1 Communications District

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 28, 2022

Blitz, who had not met Servo before, directed the investigation and instructed Servo not to interview Karthauser because he did not want to give Karthauser immunity from criminal prosecution. … Employees “need not be identical” to qualify as similarly situated; they must simply be “similar in material respects.” Earl, 658 F.3d at 1114.

Nietzche v. Freedom Home Mortgage Corporation

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 8, 2019

collect on their own behalf do not qualify as debt collectors under the FDCPA); Schlegel v. … The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to satisfy their burden of establishing sufficient service of process on Beneficial and BF1.