Case law

Peters v. Central Labor Council

179 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1946

That courts may take into consideration the purpose of the picketing is established by the great weight of authority. See eases collated in note 116 A. L. R. 501. Also see Teller on Labor Disputes, Vol. I, § 114. … That important and highly controversial question will be reserved for decision when and if it comes before us on a record where the intention of the union thus to picket is clearly manifested.

State v. Fox

262 Or. App. 473 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 23, 2014

On appeal, defendant argues that the state failed to establish that he was a “public servant.” … There was evidence in the record that, by virtue of his position as a recruiter for the Oregon National Guard, defendant qualified as a public servant.

Matteson v. LeafFilterNorth, LLC (A184754)

350 Or. App. 744 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2026

Those arguments and the evidence plaintiff points to in support of those claims do not establish a genuine issue of material fact as to whether LeafFilter was plaintiff’s employer. … Plaintiff did not otherwise produce evidence showing that defendants engaged in qualifying activities under the stat- ute.

Williams v. Columbia County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Dec 10, 2025

Bona Fide Purchaser; Public Record of Potential Additional Tax Plaintiffs argue that the additional tax should not be imposed because Defendant established a precedent of not collecting back taxes from before Plaintiffs … To DECISION TC-MD 250397N 6 establish misleading conduct requires “proof positive that the [county] has misinformed the individual taxpayer

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Northern Pacific Terminal Co.

128 F. Supp. 475 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 30, 1953

For their negligence, willfulness or de *493 fault, he was liable. 20 Their timidity or ■collusion in the face of violence gave him no immunity. … Thirdly, there is no immunity for the sympathetic strike by organizations and individuals with no unity of interest in the original controversy.

In re the Marriage of Cheever

213 Or. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 20, 2007

The cases since Grove have established a series of considerations in such cases. … The “power” to reinstate pursuant to ORS 107.136 is, thus, contextually qualified and circumscribed.

In Re Complaint as to Conduct of Devers

328 Or. 230 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1999

In sum, the record does not establish that the accused was indigent. … Disbarment clearly could be an appropriate sanction in this case. To determine whether that sanction should be imposed, we consider aggravating and mitigating factors. D.

In Re Bernard Jolles

235 Or. 262 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1963

In my opinion this is an act which clearly shows a lack of moral stamina. … The fact that one guilty of misconduct which would clearly disqualify him for admission to the Bar may establish that he has subsequently had a clean record for several years would not necessarily justify this court in concluding

Boehnlein v. Ansco, Inc.

61 Or. App. 389 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 19, 1983

She will revoke her escrow instructions and immediately demand the return of all documents, and immediately attempt to sell the property to any other qualified buyer who meets her terms. … Because defendant’s brief clearly shows which “facts” came from the depositions, and because defendant made a good faith attempt to comply with the rule, we deny plaintiffs motion to strike the entire brief.

State v. Charles

54 Or. App. 272 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 12, 1981

As to the first assigned error, during the suppression hearing the state established possession by defendant of copies of certain poems focusing on street fighting exploits. … In my opinion there is nothing else that is prejudicial in that poem, and its relevance clearly outweighs its prejudicial effect.

First Interstate Bank of Oregon, N.A. v. United States Ex Rel. Internal Revenue Service

891 F. Supp. 543 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 30, 1995

The record before this court clearly reflects that FIOR faced a real possibility of defending an unwanted lawsuit had it simply remitted the disputed funds to the IRS. … FIOR contends that the IRS regulations interpreting 28 U.S.C. § 6332 (e) reveal that the statutory grant of immunity is conditional, not absolute.

Schlimgen v. May Trucking Co.

178 Or. App. 397 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 19, 2001

Dryer warned that allowing judges to supersede juries was tantamount to establishing a “judicial monarchy.” Id. at 314. … Similarly, the Supreme Court has recently observed that a jury’s determination of the amount of punitive damages is a fact question and therefore immune from challenge under the state constitution. Parrott v.

Wold v. City of Portland

166 Or. 455 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1941

In making provision for meeting the deficit, the ordinance clearly shows that this function of the city is not contemplated as a source of revenue. … A.), intended to abolish the immunity of a municipal corporation from liability for the negligence of its officers and employes while performing governmental functions. In Rapp v.

McKee Electric Co. v. Carson Oil Co.

301 Or. 339 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1986

They should be given only where a general instruction would clearly be inadequate or would confuse or mislead the jury.’ * * * “ ‘Proposed instructions advising the jury that it may or should consider certain specific evidence … What this means is that in the ordinary malpractice case laymen are not qualified to say that a good doctor would not go wrong, and that it is only where there is expert testimony that proper skill and care would have done

State Land Board v. Rogers

219 Or. 233 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1959

When we read § 61-107, OCLA, supra, we find that the right to receive by payment in the United States or its territories is not there qualified as a reciprocal right as is the right to take by inheritance. … It is clearly stated that the right of nonresident aliens to take or inherit depends “upon the [further] right of citizens of the United States to receive, by payment to them within the United States, or its territories,

Miller v. CC Meisel Co., Inc.

183 Or. App. 148 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 7, 2002

It also acknowledged that, if plaintiff had filed a Us pendens notice, “he’d have statutory — assuming it’s filed in good faith and all that, he’d have statutory immunity!.]” … The Printing Industry court interpreted those statutes as prohibiting any changes from the jury’s verdict on the amount of damages, even if the law clearly allowed additional damages.

Stanley v. Mueller

222 Or. 194 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1960

Aside from the fact that appellants failed to prove the existence of such agreement, the record clearly contradicts that they ever entertained such in *206 tention. … Furthermore, there was not sufficient conduct establishing part performance to take the case out of the statute. It follows that Mrs.

Sandoval v. Melvin

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 10, 2021

immunity. … Qualified Immunity Defendant also asserts plaintiff’s claim fails because he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v. Hudson

190 Or. 458 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1951

To give a discount for cash payments is a long-established mercantile practice. The manufacturer allows such discount to the jobber and wholesaler, and the jobber and wholesaler, to the retailer. … The use of these general words at the end of the definition was clearly intended to explain and qualify the meaning to be given the specific terms immediately preceding.

In Re Marriage of Denton

145 Or. App. 381 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 24, 1996

Still, valuing the extent of the contributions of a homemaker *387 spouse proved difficult to establish. … That much is established by statute. ORS 107.105(1)(f).