Case law

Allred v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

124 Or. App. 278 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 3, 1993

. *281 We considered and rejected the same argument in Teague v. Board of Parole, 105 Or App 1 , 803 P2d 279 (1990), rev den 311 Or 187 (1991). … Petitioner also argues that the Board erred in not considering his efforts at voluntary restitution as a mitigating factor. The Board did initially refuse to consider that as a mitigating factor.

Ruegg v. BOARD OF CTY. COM'RS, CLACKAMAS CTY.

32 Or. App. 77 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 16, 1978

We find that there was substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision. … The circuit court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the question of standing as required by Duddles v.

First Nat. Bank v. Board of Equalization

81 Or. 240 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1916

L., and appeared with a petition before the board of equalization, seeking to have its capital stock assessment corrected in accordance therewith. … The function of a board of equalization is to correct assessments whether they be excessively high or unreasonably low.

Forelaws on Board v. Energy Facility Siting Council

303 Or. 541 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1987

The Council made the order after proceedings on remand by this court in Teledyne Wah Chang v. Energy Fac. Siting Council, 298 Or 240 , 692 P2d 86 (1984).

Innovative Design & Construction, LLC v. Construction Contractors Board

278 Or. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 25, 2016

Entrepreneurs Foundation v. Employment Dept., 267 Or App 425, 428 , 340 P3d 768 (2014) (quoting Veselik v. SAIF, 177 Or App 280, 288 , 33 P3d 1007 (2001)); see Oregon Occupational Safety v. … See Becklin v. Board of Examiners for Engineering, 195 Or App 186, 199-200 , 97 P3d 1216 (2004), rev den, 338 Or 16 (2005).

Larsen v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

191 Or. App. 526 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 28, 2004

Quintero v. Board of Parole, 329 Or 319, 324-25 , 986 P2d 575 (1999) (list of orders in ORS 144.335(3) is illustrative, not exclusive). … In Severy v.

Boise Cascade Corp. v. State Board of Forestry

164 Or. App. 114 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 10, 1999

On appeal, we reversed, Boise Cascade Corp. v. Board of Forestry, 131 Or App 538 , 886 P2d 1033 (1994), and the Supreme Court allowed review. … Boise Cascade Corp. v. Board of Forestry, 325 Or 185 , 935 P2d 411 (1997). 2 On remand, Boise dropped its claim under the Oregon Constitution and proceeded only on its federal constitutional claim.

Martin v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

147 Or. App. 37 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 12, 1997

In *40 support of his contention, he relies on Owens v. Board of Parole, 113 Or App 507 , 834 P2d 547 (1992), and Dingman v. … As we explained in Home Plate, Inc. v.

State Land Board v. Port of Portland

232 Or. 607 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1962

This is an action by the State Land Board against the Port of Portland to recover royalties for riverbed material taken from the Columbia River. The Port appeals from a judgment for the State Land Board. … commerce and payment shall be made to said State Land Board of such royalty as the board may fix therefor.

Norris v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

152 Or. App. 57 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 7, 1998

Severy v. Board, of Parole, 318 Or 172, 179 , 864 P2d 368 (1993). … Norris v.

Meadows v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

181 Or. App. 565 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 29, 2002

B. v. … Compare Russell v.

Strawn v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

217 Or. App. 542 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 30, 2008

Gordon v. … The board’s May 25, 2005, order is consistent with that requirement. See, e.g., Haskins v.

Eli v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

187 Or. App. 454 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2003

“[ORS 144.335(1)] means: An inmate must use any process of administrative review provided by Board rule * * * before seeking judicial review.” Jenkins v. … Garcia v. Board of Parole, 109 Or App 321 , 818 P2d 1296 (1991).

Carroll v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

124 Or. App. 180 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 20, 1993

In Anderson v. … Board of Parole, 303 Or 618, 625-26 , 740 P2d 760 (1987), which construed the pre-1988 rules, the court said: “[T]he administrative procedure for minimum sentence review works like this: The Board takes a vote to overrride

Perrin v. Oregon State Board of Higher Edhcation

15 Or. App. 268 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 5, 1973

See *271 also, Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 US 564 , 92 S Ct 2701 , 33 L Ed 2d 548 (1972); Perry v. Sindermann, 408 US 593 , 92 S Ct 2694 , 33 L Ed 2d 570 (1972).” … That hope is not á property right and the frustration of such a hope- does not trigger the right to a hearing under Board of Regents v.

Board of Cty. Comm. of Columbia Cty. v. Rosenblum

324 Or. App. 221 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 2023

The Board, on the other hand, relying on Couey v. … Brown v. Oregon State Bar, 293 Or 446, 449, 648 P2d 1289 (1982) (internal citation omitted).

Murphy v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

140 Or. App. 642 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 1996

He contends that the Board violated applicable law by failing to hold a hearing before issuing the order. He asks us to reverse the order and to remand with specific instructions that the Board release petitioner. … See, e.g., Floyd v. Motor Vehicles Div., 27 Or App 41, 44-45 , 554 P2d 1024 , rev den 276 Or 873 (1976). Affirmed.

Taylor Sands Fishing Co. v. State Land Board

56 Or. 157 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1910

Co. v. Illinois, 146 U. S. 387, 435 (13 Sup. Ct. 110: 36 L. Ed. 1018 ). … As analogous to the principle thus announced, see Dunn v. State Ummersity, 9 Or. 357, 362 ; and Salem Mills Co. v. Lord, 42 Or. 82, 90 ( 69 Pac. 1033 : 70 Pac. 832 .)

Shelby v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

244 Or. App. 348 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 20, 2011

See Roy v. … See Strawn v.

Hibbard v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

144 Or. App. 82 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 9, 1996

In Eggsman v. Board of Parole, 60 Or App 381, 385-86 , 653 P2d 1277 (1982), we held that, under the general statutory grant of authority to parole, the Board is authorized to advance the prison release date. … In Gress v. Board of Parole, 143 Or App 7 , 924 P2d 329 (1996), which involves virtually identical arguments, we rejected that premise.