Case law

Rustvold v. Taylor

171 Or. App. 128 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 22, 2000

After defendants’ negligence was discovered, plaintiff “underwent four immunization treatments in an effort to avoid contracting Hepatitis B.” … Clearly, at least some conditions and events that the law deems to be purely psychological qualify as medical concerns in the mind of a medical professional.

Polk v. Director of the Dept. of Consumer and Business Services

District Court, D. Oregon · May 7, 2025

Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Vermont, a non-resident title agency qualified … The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986).

State v. Cancelmo

86 Or. 379 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1917

considering a requested instruction, which omitted the limiting word “intentional” in an attempted definition of the crime of assault, reviews many decisions of the courts of last resort and says: “I think these authorities clearly … By this means a presumption is not based upon a presumption, but upon a fact legally established.

Morsman v. City of Madras

203 Or. App. 546 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 4, 2006

In certain other districts, all qualified voters were permitted to vote for board positions, and, in others, board members were appointed. *560 The Court held that, if a right to participate in an election is legislatively … established, a legislative determination of voter eligibility in the election is subject to strict scrutiny.

State v. Lecarros

187 Or. App. 105 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 27, 2003

Clearly, ORS 830.035(1) suffices as a source of legal authority to conduct the seizure. Further, that statute authorizes the State Marine Board to promulgate implementing regulations. … Indeed, their uncontradicted testimony establishes that the decision to seize or not to seize any particular craft was entirely within their discretion.

McDermott v. SAIF Corp.

286 Or. App. 406 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 28, 2017

Thus, where the issue is whether “an otherwise valid rule * * * conflicts with clearly stated statutory policy,” a court must “examine the applicable statutory wording in its context to determine the legislature’s intent. … that such a cause would qualify to reduce the impairment that is ‘due to’ a claimant’s compensable injury under ORS 656.214.”

Wilson v. Hendricks

164 Or. 486 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 7, 1940

Hendricks, deceased, has been established as $42,960.00.” … Hendricks are nonresidents and therefore not qualified to act as administrators of said estate; that A. S.

CHRISTIAN v. La Forge

194 Or. 450 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1952

Haase, are duly appointed, qualified and acting members of, and constitute, the Oregon State Board of Barber Examiners, hereinafter referred to as the Board; that said Sherman Christian is President of the Board, Clarence … However, the court, in the Nebbia case, made it very plain that the rule established as respects the *470 milk industry did not necessarily apply to all businesses, trades, and occupations, and indicated quite clearly that

Novins v. United States acting through the Department of Health and Human Services.

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 25, 2023

The alleged tortious conduct here, however, is not so far removed from medical services that it cannot qualify as related conduct. … The establishment, promulgation, and enforcement of policies, including establishing priorities, assigning resources, making budget decisions, and assigning personnel, also generally fall within the discretionary function

State v. Freih

270 Or. App. 555 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 22, 2015

measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury; and “(b) The threatened injury is of such gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly … However, even accepting that the claimed psychological harm would be sufficient to invoke ORS 161.200, defendant’s offer of proof was insufficient to establish entitlement to a jury instruction on the choice-of-evils defense

Flores v. ODOC

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 3, 2023

“To prevail on a Section 504 claim, a plaintiff must establish that (1) [the plaintiff] is an individual with a disability; (2) [the plaintiff] is otherwise qualified to receive a certain benefit; (3) [the plaintiff] … June 1, 2023) (dismissing disability discrimination claim under Oregon law because the “plaintiff neglects to allege facts establishing she is a qualified individual with a disability”), findings and recommendation adopted

Rivera v. Perlo Construction, LLC

336 Or. App. 307 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 20, 2024

In Gordineer, the employee brought a declaratory judgment action in circuit court to establish that his employer had committed fraud when she testified at his workers’ compensation hearing; specifically, he sought to establish … Finally, they have not argued that a qualified privilege should apply, which would provide additional protection from aiding and abetting liability.

Haber v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 4, 2020

Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have … To determine whether a government actor is entitled to qualified immunity, the court evaluates, in no particular order, whether: (1) the alleged misconduct violated a right; and (2) that right was clearly established at

Pam's Carpet Service, Inc. v. Employment Division

46 Or. App. 675 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1980

It seems to us that an alleged employe not eligible for unemployment compensation because of ORS 657.150 is rather clearly not economically dependent upon his alleged employer. … individual shall be paid benefits during his benefit year in an amount which is to be determined by taking into account his weeks of work in subject employment in his base year as provided in this section. *684 "(2) To qualify

State v. Drown

245 Or. App. 447 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 8, 2011

“There was no evidence that anybody had been in serious health danger by virtue of failing to get immunization. … Making an argument in which defendant joined, Drown’s counsel responded: “Our argument here is that there is no duty which has been produced by way of any evidence, medical or otherwise, and clearly no evidence other than

Department of Land Conservation & Development v. Jackson County

151 Or. App. 210 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 19, 1997

See OAR 660-33-020(8). 1 Under ORS 215.283(2)(e), counties may allow golf courses as a conditional use on land that is zoned EFU. 2 However, subject to OAR 660-33-130(18), OAR 660-33-120 prohibits the establishment of golf … Quite clearly, because the rule refers to a statute addressing standards applicable to certain uses that may be established in EFU zones, the rule contemplates that the use be in an EFU zone.

Travis v. Strubel

238 Or. App. 254 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 27, 2010

To qualify as a predicate unwanted contact, any contact that involves speech must be a threat—that is, the sort of communication that `instills in the addressee a fear of imminent and serious personal violence from the speaker … We therefore conclude that, although it was clearly in the parties' best interest to avoid each other, the facts as related to the court do not establish a sufficient basis for issuing an SPO. Reversed.

Buss

District Court, D. Oregon · May 7, 2026

Defendant contends that Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie disability claim, Def. … The disability is her documented hypersensitive immune system[.]” Pl. Resp. at 5 (emphasis added).

Revlon Services, Inc. v. Employment Division

30 Or. App. 729 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 22, 1977

The double requirement, that the worker’s occupation be "independently established” and that he be "customarily” engaged in it, clearly calls for an enterprise created and existing separate and apart from the relationship … Under the new paragraph (2)(b) test, it is apparent that the salesmen in Baker would have qualified as independently established businesses.

Durham v. City of Portland

181 Or. App. 409 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 8, 2002

First, [plaintiff] has failed to establish the causal link prong of her prima facie case. … Although Tate [plaintiffs immediate supervisor] clearly disagree[d] with Phillips’ final choice, I do not see evidence of pretext.