Case law

Marshall v. Pollin Hotels II, LLC

170 F. Supp. 3d 1290 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 16, 2016

The WHD’s Field Operations Handbook provides a factor test to determine whether special conditions exist that are sufficient to qualify breaks shorter than 30 minutes as bona fide meal breaks. … Thus, the Brennan court clearly did not hold that section 6415 "allows for a claim for mathematical and technical errors." Cf. Supp. Brief 2 (#61). .

Nordeutsher Lloyd, Brennan v. Brady-Hamilton Stevedore Co.

195 F. Supp. 680 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 28, 1961

There are cases where a determination of the claim against the indemnitee will establish a right to recovery, as a matter of law, against the indemnitor. … That case clearly illustrates the background on which the indemnitor is bound by the findings in the original action. This rule has been followed in the Ninth Circuit. Booth-Kelly Lumber Co. v.

Reeves v. Nooth

294 Or. App. 711 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 7, 2018

Johnson just prior to the robbery, and was clearly an aider and abettor in the course of the robbery and did receive the fruit of the robbery following that act." … Similarly, the Supreme Court's dicta in Anderson about the availability of a post-conviction remedy based on newly discovered evidence was expressly qualified ("[a]s a general rule") and does not reflect a considered examination

Kapua v. United States

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 19, 2024

To qualify as a release under the statute, there had to be a compromise or settlement reached by a meeting of the minds. We find none." Id. … [especially where] every document [he] signed in order to settle the property claim expressed clearly that by accepting the settlement he relinquished the right to bring future claims."); Penn v.

Ogden v. Ontario Oregon City Police Dept

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 12, 2021

entity or officer or employee, if the Court determines that the action (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Plaintiff does not allege facts establishing a claim of racial or class-based discriminatory animus.

State v. Simonsen

275 Or. App. 154 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 2, 2015

Thus, the form of instruction submitted by the state specified, in pertinent part: í]í “In this case, to establish the crime of unauthorized use of a vehicle, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the following four … Under that doctrine, to qualify as “plain error,” the asserted error (1) must be an error of law; (2) must be “apparent, i.e., the point must be obvious, not reasonably in dispute”; and (3) “must appear ‘on the face of the

Independent Living Resources v. Oregon Arena Corp.

982 F. Supp. 698 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 12, 1997

For instance, a facility that specializes in hosting wedding receptions and private parties may be open only to invitees of the bride and groom, yet it clearly qualifies as a public accommodation. … Bagley, 988 F.2d 868, 871 (9th Cir.1993) (public officials may be entitled to immunity for conduct that did not violate clearly established law at the time of the events in question); Pfaff v. U.S.

State v. Mayer

146 Or. App. 86 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 29, 1997

An out-of-court statement admissible under another hearsay exception cannot qualify as corroborative evidence under OEC 803(18a)(b). … “The legislature clearly intended that a defendant not be convicted on hearsay alone; therefore, a declarant’s admissible statement cannot be used to bootstrap into admissibility otherwise inadmissible statements made by

Hedlund v. EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INSTITUTE, INC.

468 B.R. 901 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 5, 2012

Accordingly, this Court cannot disturb those findings unless clearly erroneous. See, e.g., Birrane, 287 B.R. at 496 . … Here, there is some ambiguity in the record regarding whether Hedlund is qualified for the ICRP. ER 427.

State v. Smith

66 Or. App. 374 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 11, 1984

Here, admission of the jacket established defendant’s proclivity for wearing clothing similar to that worn by the victim’s assailant. … The court may appoint one or more qualified psychiatrists to examine the defendant or may order that he be taken by the sheriff to a state hospital designated by the Mental Health Division for the examination. * * * * “(3

Tilson v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 16, 2020

Employers bear the burden of establishing that they qualify for an FLSA exemption, and courts will not find an FLSA exemption applicable “except [in contexts] plainly and unmistakably within [the given exemption’s] terms … Whether a payment qualifies as a bonus under the FLSA is a legal question.

Soumie v. McLean

234 Or. 485 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1963

The foregoing uncontradicted testimony clearly reveals that there was no radical change in the attitude of Emilie toward either Lillian Kurman or Dee Soumie, if there was any change at all. … To the contrary, the record clearly shows that members of the Society visited Emilie infrequently.

State v. Mankiller

344 Or. App. 327 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 22, 2025

“In particular, we look to the harm targeted by the substantive criminal offense to identify who, in the view of the legisla- ture, would qualify as a victim.” State v. … In other words, merger is presumed unless there is evidence supporting findings establishing anti-merger.

Sunflower v. Bladorn

168 Or. App. 206 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 31, 2000

But in my years on the bench, I have seen few, if any, cases in which it speaks more clearly to the point. … It avoids quoting the complete text of even that definition, which includes the qualifying phrase “by public notice.” (Emphasis added.)

Harry Ritchie's Jewelers, Inc. v. Chlebowski (In Re Chlebowski)

246 B.R. 639 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Mar 23, 2000

He testified that he *642 had made no effort to do so, but qualified that testimony by stating that the effort was not made simply because he did not have the money to redeem the diamond. … While it might be possible to track down the diamond, it will clearly take a considerable effort. The extent and measure of the injury will be discussed in more detail below.

Ettin v. ROBINSON ET UX

221 Or. 193 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 9, 1960

However, evidence was offered, which if received would establish that Lela Mae had visited Ralph.Titus in April, 1954. … I guess I’ll just have to get immune to heart aches some' way. “Well Lela I am closing not knowing where I’m *203 going to be after another month.

Petrusich v. Unum Life Insurance Co. of America

984 F. Supp. 2d 1112 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 22, 2013

This hardly qualifies as “infrequent.” … In any event, even if Petrusich were able to take medication, her doctors clearly stated she would still not be able to return to work.

Corkum v. Bi-Mart Corp.

271 Or. App. 411 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 28, 2015

In the report that he wrote after the examination, Bernardo stated that claimant’s right inguinal hernia “clearly has been present for some period of time.” … Once the claimant establishes a compensable injury, the burden shifts to the employer to establish that “the otherwise compensable injury is not, or is no longer, the major contributing cause” of the claimant’s disability

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.

City of Enterprise v. State

156 Or. 623 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 3, 1937

The individual appointed qualifies by taking an oath and furnishing a bond “in such amount as the court and the state treasurer shall determine, * * * The compensation of said municipal administrator shall be fixed by the … The act clearly contemplates equity receiver-ships for insolvent municipalities. It employs the term municipal administrator, but includes within that term all of the power usually possessed by a receiver.