Case law

Jane v. American Red Cross

763 F. Supp. 1084 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 8, 1991

State of Oregon John Doe received a blood transfusion; that the blood used in the transfusion was supplied by the American Red Cross; and that the blood supplied by the American Red Cross was contaminated with the Acquired Immune … STANDARD OF REVIEW On an appeal from a non-dispositive order entered by a magistrate, the district court must determine whether the order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(A); McDonnell Douglas

Novick v. Myers

330 Or. 351 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 8, 2000

Section (l)(a) of the proposed measure would limit contributions and expenditures by both for-profit corporations and unions to $1,000 per election in support of or in opposition to a candidate or a qualified ballot measure … In petitioner’s view, the certified summary is deficient, because it does not explain clearly the different campaign *358 finance requirements for the different entities involved — for example, that a $1,000 limit applies

Emerald Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. Bureau of Labor & Industries

220 Or. App. 423 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 11, 2008

Board of Parole, 206 Or App 353, 366 , 138 P3d 16 (2006) (“The preservation requirements established in ORAP 5.45(1) apply to petitions for review of agency action.”). We agree with BOLI. … Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution provides that “[n]o law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all

Ruffin v. Washburn

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 7, 2023

Defendant Washburn now moves for summary judgment on grounds that he was not deliberately indifferent to plaintiff’s health and is entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity.

State v. Saunders

14 Or. 300 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1886

It does not apply to such documentary evidence to establish collateral facts, as would be admissible under the rules of the common law in other cases. Cooley Const. … The trial judge.heard their testimony, had an opportunity.to observe .their.manner., and deemed them qualified to *307 sit in the case.

PNW Metal Recycling, Inc. v. DEQ

317 Or. App. 207 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 26, 2022

The memorandum thus acknowledged that established DEQ practice was to interpret the auto dismantler exemption to apply to an entire facility, not just the auto dismantling activities within that facility, and proposed changing … We are thus able to clearly identify the rule without sifting through extensive policies or transcripts. Smith 2019, 300 Or App at 311.

Skinner and Skinner

370 Or. 534 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2022

In other words, because the maintenance awards that were imposed retroactively as a result of the 2018 corrected judgment did not exist in the 3 We also considered whether the state was immune from the imposition … We understand the Court of Appeals’ analysis to have been driven by the assumption that the trial court awarded impermissible “prejudgment interest” for which, under Chase, installment payments on support awards do not qualify

Linder v. Department of Revenue

18 Or. Tax 11 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 1, 2004

He clearly did connect the reductions to the girls’ ages. … Taxpayers state that Oregon law provides that child support orders are established by a state formula that is presumed to be correct. Taxpayers are not in error.

Purdy v. Deere & Co.

355 Or. 204 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2014

The plaintiffs asserted — and the defendant did not dispute — that, if Rector had been negligent, he and his employer, the Oregon State Police, were immune from liability to the plaintiffs under the exclusive remedy provision … In accordance with their view of the effect of that immunity, the plaintiffs sought various instructions admonishing the jury not to “weigh or consider” Rector’s conduct unless it found that it was the “sole and exclusive

United States v. Mayer

162 F. Supp. 3d 1080 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 5, 2016

the influence of alcohol did not qualify); James v. … Under Snyder, I likely could find that the term “dwelling” and the street address established a building.

Davis v. Wasco Intermediate Education District

286 Or. 261 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 1, 1979

Davis would have had a significant impact on the then-established laws governing teacher employment. HB 1474 was enacted in 1963. … Second, as noted above, ORS 236.630(3) would require school districts to establish "layoff lists” for teachers.

Lloyd Corporation v. Whiffen

307 Or. 674 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 9, 1989

Clearly they can if they do so reasonably and peaceably. … A8406-03528), then Circuit Judge William Dale in fact entered such a detailed and qualified order.

State v. Headings

140 Or. App. 421 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 17, 1996

Consequently, she believed that appellant would qualify for food stamps if she were to apply again. Appellant has received mental health treatment at Northeast Mental Health, and more recently at Kaiser Permanente. … All that that testimony establishes is that appellant relied on her daughter to deal with the loss of the daughter’s food stamps.

Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co. v. State Land Board

250 Or. 319 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1968

The immunity of government from suit should not be determined then by attempting to fit the case into one of two categories, whether governmental-proprietary, public-private, or jus publicum-jus privatum. … But the problem takes on a different complexion when the interests of the entire community do not so clearly predominate.

Ben Rybke Co. v. Royal Globe Insurance

293 Or. 513 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1982

The other objective, which is clearly discernible, was to protect an injured party from being misled into believing that a limitation period upon his claim is no longer applicable because the insurer is liable for the claim … the death, injury or destruction” is deemed ambiguous for failure to exclude insured persons absolutely, the constructional scales are tipped by reference to the latter two statutes. 3 Their terms, while also not entirely immune

Wider

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 24, 2026

To qualify for in forma pauperis status, a civil litigant must demonstrate both that the litigant is unable to pay court fees and that the claims the litigant seeks to pursue are not frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), 1915 … 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).

O'Donnell v. Oregon Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 31, 2025

. § 1997e(a), and Eleventh Amendment immunity. (Defs.’ Mot Summ. J. (Defs.’ Mot.), ECF No. 36.) … Because the record clearly demonstrates that Donnell brings his § 1983 claims against defendants in their individual capacities, defendants’ Eleventh Amendment immunity argument is inapt.

Schramm v. Done

135 Or. 16 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1930

constitutional amendment retroactively applicable to banks organized before its *22 adoption or no legislative effort to bring them under the amendment by providing that certain acts should be deemed a waiver of their constitutional immunity … The law of 1911 is clearly prospective in its language.

In Re Earnest

42 B.R. 395 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Jul 23, 1984

not qualify for the exemption. … Clearly the purpose of the time limits under both Bankruptcy Rule 2 and Bankruptcy Rule 4003 is to encourage early determination of exemption questions so all parties may then freely pursue their rights with regard to the

Deupree v. State

173 Or. App. 623 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 25, 2001

However, an abutting property owner’s common-law right to public road access is qualified by the state’s inherent power to protect the public safety, convenience, and welfare. Gruner, 96 Or App at 697 . … regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities