Case law

Jones v. Hoss

132 Or. 175 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1929

Words which have no well established technical or legal signification are to be given their plain, natural and ordinary meaning. A constitution is dependent upon ratification by the people. … The court clearly distinguished between personal and legislative expenses.

State v. Shedrick

370 Or. 255 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 6, 2022

Thus, the state reasons, the qualifying phrase—“that nec- essarily requires a culpable mental state”—refers to other elements of an offense and so might not encompass the property-value element of the theft offense. … Shedrick not established. Id.

McLaughlin v. Wilson

292 Or. App. 101 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 31, 2018

It is worth noting, however, that some legislators and proponents of HB 2352 were careful to qualify their descriptions of the bill as nonsubstantive. … . *** So, you know, I'd hate to have the impression that there is absolutely nothing in here that constitutes a change in any substance, but clearly the effort here was to keep it as non-substantive as possible ***."); Tape

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. State Board of Agriculture

198 Or. 43 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1953

They are paid the prices established by the defendant; subject, of course, to readjustment if the period’s operations result in a surplus which must be sold at a low price. … Accordingly, unless a doctrine or principle has become so well established that it may fairly be considered to have become a rule of property, * * * the courts will not adhere to it, although established by previous decisions

Idearc Media Corp. v. NORTHWEST DIRECTORIES, INC.

623 F. Supp. 2d 1223 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 23, 2008

However, examining the balance of the facts, all of which are undisputed, the court finds that Idearc’s independent contractor Denise Alvarez qualifies as an employee of Ideare under the common law of agency, and that work … It would be absurd and inefficient to require the author of a larger work to individually register every possible smaller component of that work that qualified individually for copyright protection.

Kuhn ex rel. Khun v. McNary Estates Homeowners Ass'n

228 F. Supp. 3d 1142 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 12, 2017

The letter goes on to stay that “[tjhere is no disagreement that the Kuhn’s daughter has a disability or that she qualifies for reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act. … Giebeler does, however, clearly establish that the plaintiff in a fair housing case bears the initial burden to show both necessity and reasonableness, and that once that initial burden is met, the burden shifts to the defendant

Furlong v. Tish

189 Or. 86 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 9, 1950

The only other method by which an appeal may be taken is by a written notice, and the section clearly indicates that an appeal, if not taken in open court, may be taken within thirty days “from the date of the entry thereof … Only thus can we avoid a repugnancy in the two sections; only thus can we conform to the dicta of this court and to what we consider the rule established by long practice.

Thompson v. THOMPSON

233 Or. 262 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 23, 1963

establish a shocking disparity between the amount bid and the value of the property. … The rule is sometimes stated with qualifying language. Thus in Sage v.

Wilson v. B. F. Goodrich Co.

52 Or. App. 139 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 11, 1981

In Conachan we also recognized (at 61) that most courts now apparently hold that on the question of earning capacity it is proper to consider, under some circumstances, employment for which plaintiff was qualified at the … As such, the case is clearly distinguishable from the Holdsclaw vs.

Williams v. Joyce

4 Or. App. 482 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 14, 1971

Rogers that Negroes could not qualify for tenancy in the apartment because they would be incompatible with his mother-in-law who occupied the adjoining apartment. Mr. … “These difficulties of proof may be the reason that some states provide that a person discriminated against may recover a penalty of a minimum amount and such other damages as may be established, and others establish the

Multnomah School of Bible v. Multnomah County

218 Or. 19 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 9, 1959

benevolent purposes, but it expressly confines the right of exemption to such real estate only belonging to them as shall be actually occupied in a particular manner and for a specified purpose, and this right, therefore, clearly … The fact that the profits from these operations were used for the charitable and benevolent purposes of the institution did not qualify those portions of the property so used to exempt status.

State v. McDonnell

313 Or. 478 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1992

Russell Stover, supra, 44 Or App at 545 (“the record established little more than that the [evidence] would have been cumulative[.]”). … Article I, section 20, provides: “No law shall he passed grantingto any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms; shall not equally belong to all citizens.”

STATE EX REL. JUV. DEPT. OF MULTNOMAH v. Wade

19 Or. App. 314 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 28, 1974

This exclusive interest of the state is clearly a source of potential conflict which may prevent the district attorney — whose client in these proceedings is primarily the state — from providing a child with the effective … If anything, the provisions added to the statute' in 1973 have served to make it more rather than less immune to constitutional challenge, as they have clarified to some degree the standard against which a parent’s “conduct

State v. ORTIZ-RODRIGUEZ

229 Or. App. 373 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 1, 2009

who, by his or her own admission, has committed a crime, and because of concern that an accomplice might be induced to testify falsely against the person with whom he or she committed the crime by promises of leniency or immunity … Clearly, the calls that were identified based solely on Kearl’s testimony that the numbers used to make those calls belonged to defendant cannot independently corroborate conversations between Kearl and defendant.

Gardner v. Brown

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 18, 2024

To establish an Eighth Amendment violation, a prisoner “must satisfy both the objective and subjective components of a two-part test.” Wilson v. Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 298- 99 (1991). … The Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to dismiss Gardner’s second subclaim under his Eighth Amendment claim and Gardner’s claim against Peters in her individual capacity, without considering the issue of qualified immunity

State v. Miles

273 Or. App. 271 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 26, 2015

Thus, in defendant’s view, the evidence could not establish that C considered her hips and legs to be intimate parts. … Whatever the commission and the legislature meant to do, however, they clearly decided not to do that.” Id. at 462-63 (citation omitted).

State v. Boundy

115 Or. App. 638 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 21, 1992

However her brief clearly argues that the police had no legal basis for searching her purse and seizing the bill. I cannot join in the majority’s refusal to address that issue. State v. … Her presence in the car alone could not establish probable cause. See State v. Taylor, supra, 62 Or App at 590 .

Follansbee v. Ooi

335 Or. App. 305 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 2, 2024

Our case law establishes two types of prejudice analyses for such a determination. … On the other hand, defendants argue that M&B will be prejudiced by the appeal proceed- ing without it, they state that “M&B clearly has legal rights that will be affected by Plaintiffs’ cross-appeal” and that “[plaintiffs

Willamina Education Ass'n v. Willamina School District 30J

50 Or. App. 195 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 3, 1981

It is agreed, therefore, that the superintendent shall conduct in conjuction [sic] with the IED, annually, an active search to establish a list of the most qualified substitutes available and shall continue to supplement … previously the parties have agreed to accept such awards as final and binding upon them.’ # * * * "For the above reasons, this Board holds that in this case and future cases it will enforce an arbitration award unless it is clearly

M. A. B. v. Buell

366 Or. 553 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2020

The court did conclude, as petitioner points out, that the record in this case “does not establish a repetitive pattern of conduct that qualifies as abuse under FAPA that could support an inference that the abuse will occur … Based on the trial court’s findings, this is clearly one of those cases. Respondent threatened to kill petitioner if she left him. And the parties were no longer living together because petitioner left respondent.