Case law

Oracle America, Inc. v. Oregon Health Insurance Exchange Corp.

80 F. Supp. 3d 1168 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 13, 2015

the State waived sovereign immunity from the copyright claims in this action via the venue provision in the OHA OLSA. … sovereign immunity for the copyright claim in this Federal Action pursuant to the venue clause in the OHA OLSA.

Center for Legal Studies, Inc. v. Lindley

64 F. Supp. 2d 970 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 18, 1999

Eleventh Amendment Immunity It is well established that the Eleventh Amendment bars citizens from bringing claims against a state or state agency in federal court unless the state has waived its immunity or Congress abrogates … Thus, plaintiffs also fail to establish an unlawful motive on behalf of defendants.

Gollnick v. Marvin

60 Or. 312 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1911

The material part of the statute rendering certain chattels immune from levy or sale, without the owner’s consent, are as follows: “The following property ■ shall be exempt from execution, if selected and reserved by the … It was incumbent upon the plaintiff herein to establish the fact by competent evidence that he habitually earned his living by farming, in which' occupation the use of the demanded horses was necessary. Dove v.

Trusov v. Oregon Health & Science University

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 20, 2023

After that, “in the absence of binding precedent, [courts] look to whatever decisional law is available to ascertain whether the law is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes, including decisions of state … As previously noted, qualified immunity is only an immunity from damages; it is not an immunity from declaratory or injunctive relief. L.A.

Larson v. Carpenter

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 9, 2022

Qualified immunity shields government officials from damages liability “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … However, even under the line of cases recognizing this clearly established due process right, plaintiff cannot evade qualified immunity.

Ross

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 26, 2018

immunity because they did not violate Ross’ clearly established constitutional rights. … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional right—when the officer should have known he was violating the Constitution— does he forfeit qualified immunity.”

State v. Davis

237 Or. App. 351 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 22, 2010

A well-established and unambiguous body of Supreme Court precedent establishes the framework for adjudicating the Article I, section 20, issue in this case. … A state agency director presented with more qualified applicants than positions could hire only white people because there is no law that entitles a qualified applicant to a scarce employment opportunity.

E. J. T. v. Jefferson County

370 Or. 215 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 22, 2022

public body, through the Oregon Tort Claims Act (OTCA), when the claim is 1 As we recently explained, “ORS 124.100 provides for, among other things, increased damages and attorney fees for prevailing plaintiffs who qualify … With respect to the immunity provision of the child-abuse-reporting statutes, the legislature has guaran- teed immunity to “[a]nyone participating in good faith in the making of a report of child abuse and who has reason-

Jenkins

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 2, 2026

“In § 1983 actions, qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … If a plaintiff either fails to show the official’s conduct violated a constitutional right or that the right was not clearly established, then the official is entitled to qualified immunity. Lacey v.

In Re the Marriage of Crocker

332 Or. 42 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2001

Thus, it was established authoritatively and soon after its adoption that the coverage of the original statute extended only to married women who lived apart *52 from their husbands and otherwise were qualified to receive … The equal privileges and immunities clause scrutinizes benefits in the form of privileges and immunities given to a particular class, rather than discrimination against a particular class: “The original target of this constitutional

Gold Medal LLC v. USA Track & Field

187 F. Supp. 3d 1219 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 11, 2016

First, Run Gum clearly seeks to capitalize on the unique nature of the Olympic brand generally, and the Olympic Trials in particular, in order to promote its product. … Here, however, we are not dealing with “limitless antitrust immunity.”

Holcomb v. Sunderland

321 Or. 99 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 12, 1995

Plaintiff also asserts that denial of credit for time served would violate his state and federal constitutional rights to equal privileges and immunities and equal protection, respectively. 1 Defendants and the state, which … We turn then to consider whether a sentence of probation, with jail time as a condition of probation, qualifies as a judgment of imprisonment for which back time credit must be afforded.

Alberto-Toledo v. Pulver

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 6, 2022

; and (2) whether that constitutional right was “clearly established.” … Because any alleged constitutional violation was not “clearly established,” Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. // 2 The Cruz court

Lee v. State of Or.

891 F. Supp. 1429 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 3, 1995

Two of these statutes are more fully discussed in the text of this opinion: ORS 426.070 et seq., establishing the procedure for civil commitment, and ORS 677.095, establishing a physician's standard of care. 5 . … Measure 16's “Immunities and Liabilities” section provides in relevant part: § 4.01 Immunities Except as provided in Section 4.02: (1)No person shall be subject to civil or criminal liability or professional disciplinary

Burnard v. Oregon State Hospital

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 6, 2024

) does not violate clearly established federal rights. … However, government officials are not entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Rivas-Villegas v.

Walker v. Mitchell

133 Or. App. 565 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 22, 1995

” immunity. … Accordingly, we cannot agree with the trial court that, on this record, the division’s decision to approve and register the *576 Flying M Ranch as a personal use airport qualified for discretionary function immunity.

Mol, Inc. v. Peoples Republic of Bangladesh

572 F. Supp. 79 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 18, 1983

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., contains a provision forbidding United States courts from granting a default judgment against a foreign sovereign “unless the claimant establishes his … If I were allowed to consider the purpose of the activity, it would clearly indicate that the activity was based upon the “public interest” as perceived by the government of Bangladesh, to conserve wildlife and establish

Dewberry v. Kulongoski

406 F. Supp. 2d 1136 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 21, 2005

Upon remand, the Secretary reversed her previous determination and concluded that the Hatch Tract qualified as restored lands under IGRA. … waiver of immunity by the tribe or abrogation of tribal immunity by Congress.”)

Mid-County Future Alternatives Committee v. City of Portland

310 Or. 152 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1990

“Conversely, a general law addressed primarily to substantive social, economic, or other regulatory objectives of the state prevails over contrary policies preferred by some local governments if it is clearly intended to … In a city, not more than 15 percent of the qualified voters may be required to propose legislation by the initiative, and not more than 10 percent of the qualified voters may be required to order a referendum on legislation

Allison v. Washington County

24 Or. App. 571 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 8, 1976

The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint on the ground of sovereign immunity. … The facts were established by the pleadings.