Case law

Evans v. United States

251 F. Supp. 296 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 7, 1966

of Trustees, or by the executive committee acting on behalf of the Board of Trustees.” … United States v. Portland General Electric Co., 310 F.2d 877 (9th Cir. 1962).

Hackleman v. Granquist

147 F. Supp. 826 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 7, 1957

, until the decision of the Board has become final. … As pointed out in Davis v.

Landwatch v. Connaughton

905 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 11, 2012

The Project will permanently impact sensitive riparian ecosystems, including resident redband, brook and brown trout species. … See Marble Mountain Audubon Soc. v.

Tarabochia v. Clatsop County Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 19, 2019

The Ninth Circuit has noted that “[w]ithout civil rights litigants who are willing to test the boundaries of our laws, we would not have made much the progress that has occurred in this nation since Brown v. … Board of Educ.” Stanley v. Univ. of S.

Cantley v. DSMF, INC.

422 F. Supp. 2d 1214 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 20, 2006

In Brown v. … In later years, the Oregon courts seemingly applied either the Walsh test or the Brown test. In 1985, however, the focus began to narrow on the concept of the adequacy of the remedy. In Holien v.

Ringering v. Compania Maritima De-La-Mancha

670 F. Supp. 301 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 9, 1987

Craig v. M/V Peacock, 760 F.2d 953, 955 (9th Cir.1985). If a seaman, plaintiff is entitled to traditional maritime remedies under the doctrine of seaworthiness. Id. … M/V Peacock, 760 F.2d at 956 . A river boat pilot is “taken on board at a particular place for the purposes of conducting a ship through a river, road or channel, or from or into port.” Clark v.

Womack v. Consolidated Timber Co.

43 F. Supp. 625 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 1, 1941

These skilled woodsmen who are paid by the hour and who are not boarded by the company must buy food and service thereof. Any increase in the price of board at the cookhouse will be deducted from the money paid them. … “V.

Boaters Rights Association v. Early

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 5, 2024

However, in Save Our Valley v. … Coal. to Defend Affirmative Action v. Brown, 674 F.3d 1128, 1133–34 (9th Cir. 2012) (citing Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 155–56, (1908)).

Willis v. Beaverton Police Department

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 24, 2022

Of Ed. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 280 (1977); Board of Cty. Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 403 (1997). … See Van Strum v.

Marie

49 F. 286 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 11, 1892

S. v. Winn, 3 Sum. 209 . … In the case of Ross v. McIntyre, 140 U. S. 458 , 11 Sup. Ct.

Clement v. Ecolab, Inc.

341 F. Supp. 3d 1205 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 20, 2018

While doing so, Clement was bitten by what he identifies as a brown recluse spider. See id. , ¶ 19. … See Estey v.

Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan

712 F. Supp. 1456 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 18, 1989

V. … In Portland Audubon Society v.

Webber v. Skoko

432 F. Supp. 810 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 5, 1977

Washington County, 28 Or.App. 485 , 560 P.2d 656 (1977); Desler v. Lane County Board of Comm’rs, 27 Or.App. 709 , 557 P.2d 52 (1976); South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. … Board of Comm’rs of Clackamas County, 27 Or.App. 647 , 557 P.2d 1375 (1976); Pohrman v. Klamath County Comm’rs, 25 Or.App. 613 , 550 P.2d 1236 (1976); Allison v.

McCracken v. United States

47 F. Supp. 444 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 30, 1942

Upon complaint to the Commission, the case was re-assigned for hearing before a joint board. … See United States v.

Midgett v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District

74 F. Supp. 2d 1008 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 16, 1999

In Thomas v. … Service v. Pacific Elec.

Must Hatch Incubator Co. v. Patterson

32 F.2d 714 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 27, 1927

No state board or official exists in the state of California, authorized by law to carry on the tests or issue the certificates required by the regulations of the state live stock sanitary board of the state of Oregon.” … Co. v. Husen, 95 U. S. 465 , 24 L. Ed. 527 ; Missouri, Kansas & Texas R. Co. v. Haber, 169 U. S. 613 , 18 S. Ct. 488 , 42 L. Ed. 878 ; Town of Greensboro v. Ehrenreich, 80 Ala. 579 , 2 So. 725 , 60 Am.

Foraker v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 12, 2020

McCown v. … See Lyon v.

Fougherouse v. Brownell

163 F. Supp. 580 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 10, 1958

Cruz-Sanchez v. Robinson, D.C.Cal.1955, 136 F.Supp. 52 ; United States ex rel. Brzovich v. Holton, 7 Cir., 1955, 222 F.2d 840 . … Have you been admitted to practice before the Board of Immigration Appeals and the Service? A. I have.

Miller, Anderson, Nash, Yerke & Wiener v. United States Department of Energy

499 F. Supp. 767 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 17, 1980

American Airlines, Inc. v. National Mediation Board, 588 F.2d 863 (2nd Cir. 1978); National Parks and Conservation Ass’n v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir.1974). … National Mediation Board, supra, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in holding that employee authorization cards submitted by a union to the National Mediation Board were exempted from disclosure by § 552(b)(4),

United States v. 11 CASES, ETC.

94 F. Supp. 925 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 31, 1950

NOTES [1] Brown v. Heinen, D.C., 61 F.Supp. 563, 564 . [2] Petition of Mundorff, D.C., 8 F.R.D. 7, 9 . [3] In such cases, the want of jurisdiction of the subject matter cannot be waived by appearance or consent. … Brand Oysters, D.C., 55 F.Supp. 745, 746 . [5] United States v. 23 Gross Jars, More or Less, of Enca Cream, D.C., 86 F. Supp. 824, 825 .