Case law

Ollschlager's Estate v. Widmer

55 Or. 145 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1909

The weakness of this position lies in assuming a premise not clearly established. It first appears that Ollschlager went to Germanw to marry the person whom he brought back with him, and whom he represented as his wife. … established, it without merit.

Intransit, Inc. v. Excel North American Road Transport, Inc.

426 F. Supp. 2d 1136 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 7, 2006

Wal-Mart qualifies as a shipper. … Phoenix Exp., Ltd., 156 F.Supp.2d 889, 892-894 (N.D.Ill.2001). *1144 Intransit’s complaint clearly states that it is a truck broker and that Excel is a carrier.

State v. Miles

197 Or. App. 86 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 12, 2005

He contends that Leveque qualifies as an “attending physician” within the meaning of the statute. We reject that contention. … Because Leveque did not have “primary responsibility” for defendant’s care and treatment, he does not qualify as defendant’s “attending physician” under the OMMA.

Aguilar v. Badger

304 Or. App. 769 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2020

Mother and father were not married; paternity was established by father’s acknowledg- ment on K’s birth certificate. Father filed a petition for cus- tody in June 2008. … “And so once I’ve made that determination, then I review the current parenting schedule, as much as I can, for the best interests of the child, who is clearly flourishing where he is in Oakridge.

Dish Network Corp. v. Dep't of Revenue

364 Or. 254 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 25, 2019

But while that view of unitary valuation clearly has its advocates, it appears to have arisen in a particular context that is not relevant in Oregon. … Much of the Tax Court's opinion is devoted to establishing the validity of that one-year time frame. We do not describe that portion of the opinion, because it is not relevant to the question before us.

ROOD EX REL. RICHARDS v. Coos County

240 Or. App. 68 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 2010

Medford School Dist. 549C, 232 Or App 38, 46 , 221 P3d 787 (2009) (“When the dismissal of a declaratory judgment action was clearly based on a determination of the merits of the claim * * *, our practice has been to review … a genuine issue of material fact, an affidavit or a declaration of the party’s attorney stating that an unnamed qualified expert has been retained who is available and willing to testify to admissible facts or opinions creating

Morales v. SAIF Corp.

339 Or. 574 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2005

Thus, a claimant who has retired from the labor market cannot qualify for [temporary total disability] benefits because of the claimant’s decision to refuse further wage earning employment.” Id. at 300 . … Claimant contends that the statute does not clearly indicate when its provisions are triggered.

Cal-Roof Wholesale, Inc. v. State Tax Commission

242 Or. 435 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1966

The question may be stated: Does the taxpayer, an Oregon corporation engaged in certain limited activities in the state of Washington, qualify to ex- *437 elude from its net income subject to Oregon excise tax that portion … Plaintiff’s Washington activities clearly establish sufficient contact (nexus) with the state of Washington to allow that state, using Oregon’s corporate income tax law, to impose a tax on that portion of plaintiff’s income

Brown v. Portland School District No. 1

291 Or. 77 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 27, 1981

by pleading in its answer "the ultimate facts from which governmental immunity is implied as a matter of law * * *." … But I want you to prepare an amendment saying what I meant to say four years ago, clearly and unequivocally. A: Gosh, I'll try.

State v. Willson

116 Or. 615 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1926

Chief Justice Bean, that an expert, though thoroughly qualified as a witness, cannot be permitted to give an opinion upon facts known to him, and not communicated to the jury. … While it is generally defined as the body of the crime, it is more clearly expressed by calling it the body or thing which is the victim of a wrong.

Denton v. LW Vail Co., Inc.

23 Or. App. 28 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 13, 1975

The only intersecting roads were previously established BLM roads extending northward into BLM properties. The new road crossed these. … Plaintiff contends that he qualified as a constant tres *36 passer in a limited area (sections 334 and 335).

Haystack Rock, LLC v. Roberts

343 Or. App. 244 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 4, 2025

The Robertses argue that, notwithstanding those well-established principles, our 2016 decision in Landis dic- tates a different result. … The trial court granted summary judgment for the county on recreational immunity grounds. Id.

Menchu v. United States Department of Health & Human Services

965 F. Supp. 2d 1238 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 14, 2013

While the complaint is void of any mention of the Privacy Act, a letter dated May 16, 2012, and addressed to the Agency, which was filed as an exhibit to the complaint, clearly establishes that Menchu requested the 'information … This is clearly not “an express promise that the identity of the source would be held in confidence.”

Atwood v. Strickler

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 29, 2020

This Court finds that the issuance of a new permit properly qualifies as prospective relief. … To have a protected interest in a permit, “a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire” for the permit. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577.

State v. DEBUISER

249 Or. App. 203 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 4, 2012

As noted, defendant acknowledges that he failed to preserve his argument that the trial court erred in imposing the compensatory fine in the absence of any evidence establishing that the victim suffered a pecuniary loss. … Because the record did not clearly show that the trial court had erred, the Supreme Court concluded that the claimed error did not qualify as plain error. Id. at 170 .

State v. Stark

354 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 15, 2013

Stark had any bearing on its thinking about who would qualify as a “person who has been convicted of a felony.” … The legislature used the general term “judgment” and not a qualified term such as “original judgment.”

Jackson v. Surber

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 5, 2025

Federal Register,’ that the Act’s immunity ‘is in effect.’” … 2015) (dismissing an AIC’s claims that ODOC employees violated his constitutional right to privacy, HIPAA, and the ADA by sharing his HIV-positive status with other AICs because “[t]here is no showing or indication of a qualifying

Archer v. Department of Revenue, Tc-Md 080508b (or.tax 4-23-2009)

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 23, 2009

The evidence establishes that, during 2007, Tilton was responsible for the health care needs of the children. Tilton did not claim any child care expenses on his 2007 Oregon income tax return. … The statute provides in relevant part: "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 expenses

Halloum v. 60's Diner and Restaurant LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 8, 2025

Second, it must assess whether the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune to such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2 … Or. 2013) (“A request for reasonable accommodation of a disability qualifies as protected activity under the ADA.”).

Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. Oregon State Land Board

258 Or. App. 351 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 28, 2013

The repairs were to occur during the “in-water” work period established for Sucker Creek. … The standard of review is well-established.