Case law

Paullus v. Department of Revenue

7 Or. Tax 181 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 9, 1977

License fees for self-propelled mobile cranes are established in ORS 481.210(2)(a), and for fixed load vehicles, in ORS 481.210(5). … The legislative intent to grant an exemption for self-propelled mobile cranes, against patent opposition, is clearly illustrated by this history of revocation and renewal.

Luscher v. Reynolds

153 Or. 625 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 1936

Clearly, under the Federal test for the determination of the navigability of streams, this small inland lake, which is only one mile long and one-eighth mile wide, can not be regarded as a navigable body of water in the sense … "While we have held that Blue lake is not a navigable body of water in the sense that title to the bed thereof would pass to the state upon admission to the Union, it is navigable in a qualified or limited sense.

State v. Casey

108 Or. 386 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1923

Craddock, a well-known pistol expert, qualified as such, and testified at the trial. … His guilt was clearly proved by competent evidence. He is a man of mature years. His crime shows extreme depravity.

State v. Soto

21 Or. App. 794 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1975

The mere fact that such a claim of immunity is asserted because of religious convictions is not sufficient to establish its constitutional validity.' * * *" 206 Or. at 229-30 , 292 P.2d at 138 . … Not only is such a result in my view clearly contrary to Sherbert, Cantwell and Reynolds , but it effectively nullifies the religious freedom guarantees, supra, of the federal and Oregon constitutions.

State v. Engen

164 Or. App. 591 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 1999

The court echoed, and apparently endorsed, our view that the qualifying phrase “that necessarily requires a culpable mental state” “was meant to distinguish those elements defining the substance or quality of the forbidden … First, in determining whether ORS 813.010 “clearly indicates a legislative intent to dispense with any culpable mental state requirement,” the court reviewed the history of DUII statutes in Oregon.

School District No. 1 v. School District No. 45

148 Or. 554 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1934

Clearly, habeas corpus is not available where *565 the controlling question of fact, though disputed, has been decided adversely to the relator’s contention by a tribunal having jurisdiction to decide it. State v. … There it was held that the failure of the board of supervisors to designate the location of the schoolhouse was a jurisdictional defect that was fatal to the validity of the establishment of the district.

Garcia Garfias v. United States

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 6, 2025

The moving party must establish no genuine issue of material fact exists. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). … If the moving party meets this burden, the nonmoving party must establish a genuine dispute by pointing to evidence outside the pleadings. Id. at 324.

State v. Ching Ling

16 Or. 419 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 2, 1888

This clearly Avas error. … The qualifying language in that instruction, “ or aided, assisted, or abetted in killing the deceased as charged in the indictment,” would, in my opinion, render it in the abstract erroneous.

School District No. 1 v. Multnomah County Education Service District

78 Or. App. 247 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 26, 1986

Subparagraph (B) of the rule clearly authorizes an inquiry *257 into whether studies conducted under ORS 330.535 support the plan. … Under its authority to evaluate a plan, the Board has the power to establish standards for its evaluation consistent with the legislative scheme, and it did so here.

Oregon Physicians' Service v. State Tax Commission

220 Or. 487 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 2, 1960

Gagne is clearly correct both from the standpoint of legislative history and elementary gram *495 mar. … For while it is now clearly established that a charity may carry on some commercial business without losing its exemption, Trinidad v.

Baker County v. Benson

40 Or. 207 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1901

It will be conceded, we think, by disinterested persons, that such a construction of local and special statutes should be avoided, unless the constitution clearly and in unmistakable terms commands that such acts should be … I, § 21), is, in our opinion, neither a grant nor a limitation of power, but qualifies the preceding clause, and excepts therefrom the particular acts enumerated in the qualifying clause, which the legislative assembly, in

Booth v. DeVos

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 9, 2024

However, the Supreme Court has held that “the Debt Collection Improvement Act clearly makes Social Security benefits subject to offset.” Id. at 145. … The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit unless it waives its immunity and consents to be sued. FDIC, 510 U.S. at 475.

State v. Meyer

120 Or. App. 319 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 19, 1993

Article I, section 20, provides: “No 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 citizens.” … The definition of “lewd” in ORS 163.670 and ORS 163.673 — exciting the lust or sexual desires of the viewer — is wholly consistent with the gist of those definitions and clearly harmonizes with them.

Corvallis & Eastern R. Co. v. Benson

61 Or. 359 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1912

. *369 Within the meaning of the definitions of the term “provide,” as noted above, this was clearly germane to the title of the act. … all rights, reserved under the said acts and nothing therein contained and no failure to comply with any of the provisions thereof shall be construed to have worked a forfeiture of any of the grants, rights, privileges or immunities

Terlyuk v. Krasnogorov

237 Or. App. 546 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 29, 2010

Defendant asserts that plaintiffs’ textual and contextual construction of ORCP 71 B(1)(a) is inconsistent with the grammatical structure of the phrase, which clearly sets forth four distinct grounds for setting aside a judgment … We need not determine what type of mistake, surprise, or inadvertence qualifies under the rule in this case because we conclude that defendant’s conduct was excusably neglectful.

State v. Ott

61 Or. App. 576 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 16, 1983

He argues that here the state had already obtained one psychiatric examination as a matter of right under ORS 163.135(5) and had to establish a necessity for a second. Assuming that the second examination by Dr. … The jury was faced with three alternatives, and the verdict form indicated clearly the number required to return each of the three alternative verdicts.

Butler v. Shoemake

173 F. Supp. 2d 1069 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 12, 2001

Qualification for Disability Benefits Under Standard’s Policy To qualify for benefits under Standard’s LTD policy, Plaintiff must become disabled while insured under the policy. … Plaintiff has not pointed to any clearly erroneous factual findings relied on by Standard.

Wheaton v. Kulongoski

209 Or. App. 355 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 29, 2006

Medically needy benefits qualify as such assistance, and DHS does not suggest otherwise. … Statutes in that category did not need amendments because they clearly called for contested case hearings.

State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department of Multnomah County v. Cornett

121 Or. App. 264 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1993

Clearly, Weir was working as a mental health care professional. We now turn to the second and third requirements of Moen . … Clearly, the Mental Health Division considers a “Qualified Mental Health Professional” to be competent to assess relationships and mental status, document diagnostic impressions, treat and counsel in a mental health setting

Fougherouse v. Brownell

163 F. Supp. 580 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 10, 1958

In these latter articles, nothing appears that would remotely establish his membership in the Communist Party, hence they were also irrelevant. … Such matters are so exclusively entrusted to the political branches of government as to be largely immune from judicial inquiry or interference.” Harisiades v.