Case law

Brown v. State of Oregon, Department of Corrections

173 F.R.D. 262 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 26, 1997

Before the court is Brown’s motion to compel discovery (# 42). … Brown alleges causes of action in his complaint based on federal statutes. Federal common law acknowledges a qualified privilege for official information, including government personnel files. Sanchez v.

Adams v. Board of Clinical Social Workers

201 Or. App. 500 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 8, 2005

ORS 183.482(8)(a); see Pauly v. Employment Division, 74 Or App 479, 483, 703 P2d 991 (1985). … See ORS 183.450 ("[E]rroneous rulings on evidence shall not preclude agency action on the record unless shown to have substantially prejudiced the rights of a party[.]”); Hoffman Construction Co. v.

Dement Ranch v. Curry County Board of Commissioners

306 Or. App. 315 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 2, 2020

Query and Yockim Carollo LLP. 316 Dement Ranch v. Curry County Board of Commissioners David C. Johnston argued the cause for respondent Dement Ranch, LLC. Also on the brief was Law Office of David C. … See State v.

Strawberry Hill 4 Wheelers v. Board of Commissioners

287 Or. 591 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 23, 1979

After the board nevertheless decided to vacate the stretch of road in question, plaintiffs filed a petition for a writ of review attacking the legality of the board’s order in substance and procedure. … In Mountain v.

Guzman v. BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON

200 Or. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 6, 2005

the board’s failure to afford a timely hearing. … For instance, petitioner could have compelled the board to act by writ of mandamus. ORS 34.110; see also Valleur v.

Shelby v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

140 Or. App. 102 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 27, 1996

Accord Miller v. … Collins v.

McPherson v. Coos Bay-North Bend Water Board

318 Or. App. 582 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 30, 2022

See, e.g., Knapp v. … Portland Police Assn. v. Civil Service Board, 292 Or 433, 440, 639 P2d 619 (1982).

Fernandez v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

137 Or. App. 247 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 11, 1995

We review the Board’s order for an erroneous interpretation of a provision of law. ORS 183.482(8); Price v. Board of Parole, 301 Or 393, 396-97 , 723 P2d 314 (1986). … See Or Const, Art IV, § 25; Art V, § 15b.

Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners

148 Or. 50 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1934

Appellant asserts that this case is not good law and that it is not consistent with the two earlier cases of State Board v. Macy, 92 Wash. 614 ( 159 P. 801 ), and State Board v. Jordan, 92 Wash. 234 ( 158 P. 982 ). … In commenting on this case, it was said in State Medical Board v.

Delehant v. Board on Police Standards & Training

115 Or. App. 598 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 26, 1993

Morphet v. Morphet, 263 Or 311, 322 , 502 P2d 255 (1972). … BPST cited Ballard v. Board of Trustees of Police Pension Fund of Evansville, 452 NE2d 1023 (Ind App 1983), in support of its order. Ballard, a retired Indiana policeman, was convicted of a felony in Arizona.

Emanuel Lutheran Charity Board v. Department of Revenue

263 Or. 287 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 27, 1972

The plaintiff, Emanuel Lutheran Charity Board, operates Emanuel Hospital in Portland. … Unander v. U. S. Nat’l Bank, 224 Or 144, 150-151 , 355 P2d 729 (1960); Methodist Homes, Inc. v. Tax Comm., 226 Or 298 , 360 P2d 293 (1961); Willamette Univ. v. Tax Comm., supra; Beter v.

Anderson v. Publishers Paper Co.

78 Or. App. 513 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 16, 1986

In Brown v. … McPherson v. Employment Division, supra. In so contending, it relies on a footnote in Brown v.

Atkinson v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

280 Or. App. 410 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 31, 2016

See Brumnett v. … In the board’s view, the issue is controlled by our decisions in Rivas v. Persson, 256 Or App 829 , 304 P3d 765 (2013), and Miller v. Board of Parole, 261 Or App 795 , 323 P3d 980 (2014).

Atkinson v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

341 Or. 382 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 21, 2006

Norden v. Water Resources Dept., 329 Or 641, 645 , 996 P2d 958 (2000). … In State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v.

Papadopoulos v. Oregon State Board of Higher Education

14 Or. App. 130 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 27, 1973

Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 US 564 , 92 S Ct 2701 , 33 L Ed 2d 548 (1972); Perry *165 v. Sindermann, 408 US 593 , 92 S Ct 2694 , 33 L Ed 2d 570 (1972); see also, Slochower v. … We have previously treated the Board’s 1969 Adm. Code as having the force of law. West v. Bowers, 11 Or App 364 , 502 P2d 270 (1972), Sup Ct review denied (1973); Vandever v.

Luckey v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

150 Or. App. 480 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 15, 1997

The Board denied relief, and petitioner seeks review. Petitioner relies upon our decision in Bollinger v. Board of Parole, 142 Or App 81 , 920 P2d 1111 , rev allowed 324 Or 394 (1996). … judgment or certain special writ proceedings * * Shelby v.

Lyford v. BOARD OF COM'RS FOR BENTON

59 Or. App. 585 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 13, 1982

On review of this court’s decision in Hitchcock v. McMinnville City Council, supra, the Supreme Court observed in dictum that with the expansion by Fasano v. Washington Co. … See Adam v. City of Scappoose, 27 Or App 219 , 555 P2d 809 (1976).

Weldon v. Board of Licensed Professional Counselors & Therapists

266 Or. App. 52 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 8, 2014

In Corcoran v. Board of Nursing, 197 Or App 517 , 107 P3d 627 (2005), we considered, in detail, the operation of *62 subsections (3) and (4). … See, e.g., Dillard, 179 Or App at 26 n 1; State v.

Tran v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners

254 Or. App. 593 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 16, 2013

Wilson v. Tri-Met, 234 Or App 615, 624 , 228 P3d 1225 , rev den, 348 Or 669 (2010); see also Stull v. … .”); see also Patton v.

Laing v. Psychiatric Security Review Board

256 Or. App. 40 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 3, 2013

the Parole Board.” … Cf.Arken v. City of Portland, 351 Or 113, 138-39 , 263 P3d 975 (2011) (explaining that “promissory estoppel against a governmental entity * * * can be applied only in limited circumstances”).