Case law

Hoffman v. Foremost Signature Insurance

989 F. Supp. 2d 1070 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 21, 2013

“First, a party’s later position must be ‘clearly inconsistent’ with its earlier position.” Id. … This Court is not persuaded that this valuation ' difference is “clearly inconsistent.”

Bond v. Brown

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 9, 2024

The Privileges or Immunities Clause provides that “[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States[.]” U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1, cl.2. … With respect to substantive due process, that claim is, as previously noted, not clearly made out on the face of the proposed TAC.

McKenzie Law Firm, P.A. v. Ruby Receptionists, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 16, 2019

The work-product doctrine “is not a privilege but a qualified immunity protecting from discovery documents and tangible things prepared by a party or his representative in anticipation of litigation.” Admiral Ins. … Aug. 22, 2019) (“Once the party objecting to discovery establishes that the materials are protected work product, the burden shifts to the party asserting waiver to establish that a waiver has occurred.”); Towne Place Condo

John Coe Richardson v. Deschutes County Circuit Court, et al.

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 9, 2026

These entities are immune from suit under Section 1983 because they are state entities shielded by the Eleventh Amendment. … Public defenders and private attorneys generally do not qualify as persons acting under the color of state law for purposes of Section 1983 claims. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325 (1982); Simmons v.

Martyr v. Bachik

770 F. Supp. 1406 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 1, 1991

The defendants represent that they do not censor such mail if it is clearly labeled as legal mail. Requiring Martyr to label such mail is a reasonable requirement. … Commercial establishments Martyr has failed to establish a probability of success on the merits of his claim that he has an absolute right to send uncensored mail to these addressees. 8.

Carr v. Leonard

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 3, 2024

That absolute immunity applies not only to judges, but also “for advocates and witnesses” involved in the proceedings. Jd. … Rather, the plaintiff must establish that this harm is likely. Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1131 (9th Cir. 2011).

The Ninfa

156 F. 512 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 7, 1907

Where not qualified or restricted by an express agreement, there was an implied warranty by the shipowner attending every contract for the carriage of goods at sea that his vessel was seaworthy at the outset of the voyage … The immunity from risks of a described character, when due diligence has been used, cannot be so extended as to cause the statute to say that the owner, when he has been duly diligent, is not only exempted in accordance with

Baguiao v. Coffman

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 17, 2019

Coffman is shielded from liability by the doctrine of qualified immunity; and (4) Ms. Baguiao’s claims against Ms. Coffman in her official capacity are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Def.’s Mot. Summ. … Baguiao’s claims are without merit, I do not address qualified immunity or the Eleventh Amendment. 1 The Policy as an Ex Post Facto Law As the United States Supreme Court has made clear, “[t]he Constitution

Portland Trust & Savings Bank v. United States

24 F. Supp. 953 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 3, 1938

The sovereignty of the United States insures immunity to suit without consent. … No revolutionary innovation in legal theory is propounded by these decisions, but rather a conformity to established construction of statutes of limitation from Jacobean times to the present. 13 The stipulated facts do not

Oregon Wild v. U.S. Forest Service

193 F. Supp. 3d 1156 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 17, 2016

Because the Court concludes that Plaintiffs’ CWA claim fails on the merits, it need not address the parties’ arguments on the scope of sovereign immunity or Oregon’s authority. … By deleting the provision, DEQ merely eliminated agencies’ ability to automatically qualify as compliant by implementing BMPs.

Johnson v. Brown

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 5, 2022

that they qualified for an exemption.”). … Privileges Or Immunities Claim Plaintiffs allege that the Vaccine Orders also violate the Privileges Or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.4 Plaintiffs allege that they

City of Portland v. HomeAway.com, Inc.

240 F. Supp. 3d 1099 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 9, 2017

Thus, HomeAway can be an Operator only if it qualifies as a Managing Agent. … First, HomeAway .argues that the Terms and Conditions, entered into between HomeAway and. travelers, clearly establish that .the service fee is not for occupancy.

United States v. Greathouse

297 F. Supp. 2d 1264 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 20, 2003

Having established a fourth amendment violation relative to the nature of his detention, the government bears the burden of establishing the absence of any causal connection between the illegality and the evidence sought … were entitled to qualified immunity because the issue was unsettled.

Shelton v. Wilson (In re Wilson)

311 B.R. 566 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 22, 2004

Specifically, any “collection agency” could qualify for the statutory exclusion for providing “factoring services.” … A Bankruptcy Court’s findings of fact are accorded great weight and should only be set aside if clearly erroneous. Fed. R. Bankr. Pro. 8013.

Bird v. Lewis & Clark College

104 F. Supp. 2d 1271 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 24, 2000

The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). … Rather, he alleges that the University knew that he was not qualified academically to participate in its curriculum.

National Warranty Insurance v. Greenfield

24 F. Supp. 2d 1096 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 17, 1998

Instead, employers must participate in the State of Ohio’s trust fund or through a qualified self-insurance plan. … Assuming that a disparate impact analysis applies, the record of this case clearly supports NWIC.

Brown v. Oregon Department of Transportation

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 5, 2020

Turning to ODOT, which is an agency of the State of Oregon, the Eleventh Amendment provides that a state is immune from suit in federal court unless Congress has abrogated the state’s immunity by appropriate … But when a plaintiff requests a “mandatory injunction,” that “already high standard . . . is further heightened,” and the plaintiff must “‘establish that the law and facts clearly favor her position, not simply that

United States v. Osborn

409 F. Supp. 406 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 6, 1975

This document clearly falls within the privilege. Item 4: Two Wills As noted above, Osborn possesses no documents pertaining to item 4. … To so hold would extend virtual immunity to every client file maintained in an attorney’s office.

Harrington v. City of Portland

708 F. Supp. 1561 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 26, 1988

During her tenure in the Bureau of Police, Plaintiff was promoted from Policewoman to Police Detective, Police Sergeant, Police Lieutenant and Police Captain, having qualified for these positions through competitive examinations … If there was a tort committed as alleged, Mayor Clark is immune from liability in this claim. Count 2 of the fourth claim for relief is dismissed. 4.

Anderson

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 13, 2026

Additionally, a court must dismiss a complaint on immunity grounds once it has “sufficient information to make a determination” that defendants are entitled to absolute or qualified immunity. Chavez v. … A court may issue an ex parte TRO without notice to the adverse party only if “specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly shows that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the