Case law

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.

Sandys v. Williams

46 Or. 327 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1905

Mhch has been said in respect to the limits of police *338 power, but no text-writer or court of last resort has definitely established its confines. … It is needless, however, to speculate upon the motives that brought about the immunity adverted to, for the city council, having plenary power under the provisions of the charter of Portland, could exempt hotels from the

Parkhurst v. Dept. of Revenue

4 Or. Tax 586 · Oregon Tax Court · Dec 15, 1971

The Director of the Department of Revenue concluded that all of the corporation’s property qualified for exemption from taxation under ORS 307.130 and ORS 307.140. … Furthermore, the program itself does not qualify as education under the exemption statute.

State v. Hoffman

236 Or. 98 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1963

Paragraph (2) clearly shows the intent of the act to be that the sentence upon the principal offense should be pronounced according to the law applicable to the facts found by the court as to prior convictions. … had been established by legislative action.

Oregon Pottery Co. v. Kern

30 Or. 328 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1897

the range and extent of such an examination is not subject to appellate review, except in case of an abuse of discretion, we should probably hesitate to reverse the case on this point alone, although we are unable to very clearly … The value of property of this kind may be established by the opinion of witnesses who first show that they are qualified to give an opinion.

Monroe v. Hughes

860 F. Supp. 733 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 9, 1991

Although compliance with auditing standards will not immunize an auditor from all liability, compliance or non-compliance with regulations may be helpful in determining the issue of “recklessness.” … Poor internal control are not in the list of identified factors which should lead an accountant to consider qualifying her report.

Boquist v. Courtney

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 17, 2023

Finally, Defendants aver that even if this Court does not grant absolute immunity, they are entitled to qualified immunity. Defs.’ Mot. 25. … But government officials are not entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Rivas-Villegas v.

Friends of the Wild Swan, Inc. v. Thorson

260 F. Supp. 3d 1338 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 1, 2017

Thus, the fact that a recovery plan carnes with it “real-world consequences” is not enough to qualify it as a final agency action. 7 . … ESA and APA provisions, to establish waiver of immunity Coos County must have successfully stated a claim under those provisions....

State Ex Rel. Willamette National Lumber Co. v. Circuit Court

187 Or. 591 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1949

Nevertheless, relator had a right to stand upon its statutory immunity in the premises, and its resort to mandamus upon the denial of its motion to quash was proper. … The principal place of business, is usually held to be the place where its executive officers meet to transact the governing business of the corporation proper and where its books are kept. * * *” *608 This text is qualified

State ex rel Sajo v. Paulus

297 Or. 646 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1984

We do not suggest that the Secretary of State exceeded her authority when she established a verification process for the 15 day post-filing period. … Qualified voters Article IV, section l(2)(b) requires petitions to be signed by “qualified voters.”

Abraham v. Corizon Health, Inc.

369 Or. 735 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2022

See 42 USC § 2000a(e) (“The pro- visions of this subchapter shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made … available to the customers or patrons of an establish- ment within the scope of subsection (b).”).

Cortez v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 070754c (or.tax 2-14-2008)

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 14, 2008

The statute provides in relevant part: *Page 3 "A qualified taxpayer shall be allowed a credit against the taxes otherwise due under ORS chapter 316 equal to the applicable percentage of the qualified taxpayer's child care … Plaintiffs bear the burden of proof and must establish their case by a "preponderance" of the evidence. ORS 305.427 .

Burke v. Children's Services Division

288 Or. 533 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1980

It does, however, seem unlikely that the legislature intended to establish such a bifurcated procedure by indirection. … The case falls squarely within the quoted immunity provisions. Plaintiffs also rely on Tupper v.

Coyle v. P.T. Garuda Indonesia

180 F. Supp. 2d 1160 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 27, 2001

Clearly the Badens’ ultimate destination was Oregon; there is no evidence they planned to remain in Indonesia. … Airlines, 525 U.S. at 169-70, 119 S.Ct. 662 , and by the FSIA, which establishes rules that govern claims against a foreign government even when, as here, sovereign immunity has been waived.

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.

Lamb v. Vaughn

14 F. Cas. 1034 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Mar 28, 1872

As to the words “agreed,” “to be sold:” The words “jointly, or any of them separately,” would never have been used to qualify the word agreed, used in the sense indicated. … The agreement by which the lots in the clause in question were agreed to be sold— by which the sales intended were effected— is clearly what is intended, as jointly or separately made.

State v. Worsham

373 Or. 739 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 24, 2025

.’ * * * He has a duty, injecting himself, not to provoke or be the initial aggressor, which he clearly does.” (Emphasis added.) … But because none was requested, defendant cannot establish that the ungiven supplemental instruc- tion was correct in all respects.

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.

REX - Real Estate Exchange, Inc. v. Brown

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 9, 2021

So long as they acted pursuant to a clearly articulated state policy, they are be entitled to state-action immunity. See Charley’s Taxi Radio Dispatch Corp. v. … Defendants, on the other hand, argue that the Board and its members are immune from suit because they lack any authority to adopt, establish, or enforce state policy.

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

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

After considering relevant case law, I conclude that the memorandum at issue falls within the established definition of “privileged” and within the established definition of “confidential”. *771 I find that the document is … It is uncontested that the document is a legal memorandum prepared by PGE’s attorney and communicated to an agent of PGE; therefore, at least initially, the document was clearly privileged information.