Case law

Dickman v. School District No. 62c

232 Or. 238 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1961

The evidence establishes, and the trial judge found, that the purpose of the Catholic church in operating the St. … The furnishing of textbooks even more clearly constitutes an educational aid.

Oregon College of Education Federation of Teachers v. Employment Relations Board

29 Or. App. 39 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 11, 1977

In fact, she had assumed all of the responsibilities and was entitled to all of the benefits of employment within the qualifying payroll period. … She clearly shared a community of interest with her fellow employes sufficiently to enable her to participate in decisions regarding representation.

Hyster Co. v. Department of Revenue

4 Or. Tax 351 · Oregon Tax Court · Mar 31, 1971

The decision stated: “The evidence clearly establishes that plaintiff *356 is in the business of manufacturing trucks; it is not in the business of warehousing or being a storage and distribution center for goods brought … for transshipment to an out-of-state destination (other than the county of origin) and (5) is being shipped or is being held in storage.awaiting further shipment. *357 The evidence shows that plaintiff’s property does not qualify

Salem Mills Co. v. Lord

42 Or. 82 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 25, 1902

Justice Watson says: “An agent of the state, whether incorporated or not, by virtue of his character simply, possesses no such immunity from being sued. … This brings us to an application of the principles thus established to the conditions here involved.

Equitable Savings & Loan Ass'n v. State Tax Commission

3 Or. Tax 1 · Oregon Tax Court · May 5, 1967

Plaintiff has been qualified to do business in Idaho since 1906. … The evidence clearly indicated that from the beginning the plaintiff was fully cognizant of the legal issues involved and the basis for the proposed assessment. It was not misled in any way.

State v. Williams

374 Or. 648 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 30, 2025

Third-degree robbery, as defined under ORS 164.395, establishes the base level of that offense. … It would be clearly robbery, but it’s a threat to do bodily harm. And a threat to do bodily harm to this person could be extortion if it’s a threat to do harm to him in the future.

United States v. Dean

169 F. Supp. 3d 1097 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 15, 2016

The district court held that the § 2255 petitioner “can clearly establish prejudice in this case.... if the Court had applied the correct guideline range (without the career offender enhancement), then it would have sentenced … [petitioner] to a lower sentence, establishing prejudice.” 12 Id. at *7.

State v. Hernandez-Esteban

374 Or. 300 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 25, 2025

Defendant established a case-specific theory of substan- tial prejudice, supported by the record. … Defendant’s argument fit comfortably into the theories that we identified in Delaney, 370 Or at 575, and clearly articulated how and why the jury would likely base its decision on either emotion or impermissible inferences

Merkle v. State Tax Commission

2 Or. Tax 283 · Oregon Tax Court · Dec 3, 1965

The facts in that case are clearly distinguishable from the facts in our case. … by the appraisers) for the purpose of establishing the adjusted basis.

Pierson v. Dept. of Revenue, Tc 4886 (or.tax 1-13-2010)

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 13, 2010

See Or Laws 2003, ch 806 , § 1. 6 What the legislature intended to do, and in fact did, was to immunize the Oregon inheritance tax system from the 2001 federal changes by: (1) Continuing, in ORS 118.010 , the basic provision … The invalidity of that premise has been established above. The Oregon legislature has incorporated into ORS 118.010 "the maximum state death tax credit *Page 14 allowable."

Kupillas v. Sage and Social LLC

337 Or. App. 67 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 26, 2024

Dwellings or structures used by the public do not qualify as agricultural buildings. ORS 455.315(2)(a)(B). … Dept. of Rev., 353 Or 616, 620, 302 P3d 804 (2013) (construing courts “resolve any ambiguity by applying well-established canons of statutory construction”).

Huxford v. Adult & Family Services Division

174 Or. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 2, 2001

We therefore begin by discussing the relationship between the support payments in self-sufficiency programs and the payments in other programs that clearly constitute grants of public assistance. … By definition, self-sufficiency support payments do not qualify as “grants of aid.” 10 Petitioner also makes two arguments under federal law.

United States Nat. Bank of Portland v. United States

188 F. Supp. 332 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 30, 1960

In said return the executor did not include any part of the value of the said inter vivos trust established by decedent and claimed a deduction of $12,000 for the said widow’s allowance paid to the said surviving spouse. … The opinion clearly indicates that if said income was sufficient for the support of the widow, then a widow’s allowance from the husband’s estate would be improper.

Mannix v. Portland Telegram

144 Or. 172 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1933

. * * * This immunity rests on obvious grounds of public policy and convenience. … It clearly appeared from his answers and otherwise that he had been so removed or disbarred. That was as far as the prosecution was entitled to go.

State v. Jim

13 Or. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 2, 1973

An accusation of theft by extortion must be supported by proof establishing theft by extortion.” The effect of the trial court’s ruling on the demurrers at bar is to negate the second sentence of subsection (2) above. … An indictment in the language of the statute is generally sufficient with certain qualifying exceptions. State v. Smith, supra; State v. Anderson, supra.

Stumpf v. Continental Casualty Co.

102 Or. App. 302 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 27, 1990

The court concluded that “the defendant * * * could not secure immunity from liability for the negligence of the physicians it might employ to perform the contract on its behalf by the plea *308 that it exercised due care … Those allegations do not, as a matter of law, constitute wilful non-cooperation, which is required to establish the defense. See Rosalez v. Unigard Insurance Co., 283 Or 63, 67 , 581 P2d 945 (1978).

Helms Deep, LLC v. Dept. of Rev.

25 Or. Tax 210 · Oregon Tax Court · Feb 13, 2023

The court had no occasion to decide whether a particular structure qualified as a dwelling. … The only reference to an ear- lier date is a shot discussing the establishment of a founda- tion in 2017, the relevance of which is not apparent from the admissible evidence. C.

Mead v. Turnage

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 20, 2020

immunity. … Qualified Immunity Defendants move for summary judgment on the additional basis that they are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiff’s claims.

Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co. (In re Comp. of Garcia-Solis)

365 Or. 26 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 31, 2019

appliances, arising out of and in the course of employment requiring medical services or resulting in disability or death; an injury is accidental if the result is an accident, whether or not due to accidental means, if it is established … See ORS 656.267(1) (must be "clearly request[ed]," with certain forms specifically not allowed); ORS 656.262(6)(d) (worker must give notice of any "incorrectly omitted" conditions in writing).

Stranahan v. Fred Meyer, Inc.

153 Or. App. 442 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 22, 1998

However, that mental state, even if it had been conclusively established, is not a defense to a false arrest action.” Stranahan v. … “An abuse of discretion occurs when a court exercises its discretion to an end not justified by and clearly against the evidence and reason.” Lutz v. State, 130 Or App 278, 285 , 881 P2d 171 (1994).