Case law

State v. Selness

334 Or. 515 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 19, 2002

Morrow is unspecific about the lands of penalties that mark a civil proceeding as criminal in nature, but leaves open the possibility that penalties other than imprisonment might qualify. … The findings clearly express a civil intent. See Or Laws 1989, ch 791, § 1(5) (“[t]he application of any remedy under this Act is intended to be remedial and not punitive”).

State v. Swader

72 Or. App. 593 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 13, 1985

The victim’s statement clearly is relevant to the case. … The court was careful to qualify that statement in United States v.

Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1J

303 Or. 1 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1987

The court intervenes only when it can say that the actor’s conduct clearly meets the standard or clearly falls below it.” 255 Or at 607. 16 III. … The dissent in the Court of Appeals distinguished these decisions on grounds that public school students are not analogous to customers of business establishments conducted for profit. Fazzolari v. Portland School Dist.

Strickland v. Arnold Thomas Seed Service, Inc.

277 Or. 165 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1977

The pool members contend that the above provisions, when read together, clearly indicate that all qualifying seed which came under Arnold Thomas’ control during the pool period would become a part of the pool, and that within … Equitable S & L Assn., 268 Or 544, 568 , 522 P2d 478 (1974), we held that a trustee had the burden of proof to establish that it clearly explained to the beneficiary that a proposed investment of the trust corpus was one

Oravetz v. Probate Washington State

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 19, 2024

Second, it must assess whether the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune to such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)( … Plaintiff should briefly and clearly explain who the defendants are, what they have done, and why Plaintiff believes the defendants should be held liable for his injury.

Oravetz v. Oravetz

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 15, 2024

Second, it must assess whether the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune to such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)( … Plaintiff should briefly and clearly explain who the defendants are, what they have done, and why Plaintiff believes the defendants should be held liable for his injury.

Fleck

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 2, 2026

FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM It is well established that the “same substantive rules apply to Rule 12(b)(6) and [Section] 1915(e) dismissals for failure to state a claim.” … But even if Fleck had clearly alleged that Del-One furnished the same report on behalf of both Del-One and “Delaware Federal Credit Union,” the tradeline Fleck challenges clearly reflected the same $31,550 unpaid auto loan

Schramm v. Bank of California, National Ass'n

143 Or. 546 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1933

The entire act, in our opinion, clearly indicates a general purpose to preserve the assets of banks free from all liens except the one granted to the depositors. … The note given to the national bank which had made the excessive loan was no longer owned by the bank but was involved in a suit between its new owner and a third party who were endeavoring to establish priorities to a fund

Marsh v. Saif Corp. (In re Comp. of Marsh)

297 Or. App. 486 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 15, 2019

We acknowledge, however, that the board's order does not clearly state that it rejected claimant's argument for that reason, and not because claimant failed to persuade the board that the injury existed. … employer at injury for the 52 weeks prior to the date of injury. *** For workers employed less than 52 weeks *** insurers must use the actual weeks of employment *** with the employer at injury or all earnings, if the worker qualifies

United States v. Oregon

122 F.R.D. 571 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 7, 1988

The original Plan had a term of five years and set conservation goals for each- fish species, established fishing regulations and provided for the establishment of future management techniques. … Clearly, this action cannot become a forum for west coast ocean fishing, let alone the entire Pacific Rim past which these marvelous fish migrate.

Appeal of Kliks

158 Or. 669 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1937

Ordinarily well-established principles and rules are at hand. … That constant value which levels the effects of depressions and booms is the value which our statute seeks when it employs the qualifying words “normal conditions”. See Tremont & Suffolk Mills v.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Cobb

345 Or. 106 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 17, 2008

Misrepresentation and dishonesty The Bar contends that the conduct of the accused that it claims violated DR 1-102(A)(3), discussed above, also qualifies as conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. … The Bar alleges without specification that the accused “possessed information clearly establishing that Management Company and MLP were perpetuating a fraud upon the court in the Chapter 7 proceeding.”

Peterson v. Snodgrass

683 F. Supp. 2d 1107 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 5, 2010

In particular, “when the employer may qualify for an exemption under the state law but not the federal law ... the employer is required to comply with the federal law.” Id. … This is clearly outside the statutory window for the payment of wages, entitling Peterson to summary judgment as to liability for a penalty under ORS 652.140.

Barott v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 30, 2013

Tax Court determined that the taxpayer’s jeep was not a “qualified nonpersonal use vehicle” similar to the following “specialized-use vehicles”: “clearly marked police and fire vehicles, ambulances, hearses, vehicles … leased by the person operating such establishment.

Marstaller v. ALBINA DOCK CO.

191 Or. 145 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1951

Though perhaps wholly unnecessary for us to elucidate the obvious, nevertheless, under the facts in this case it is clearly apparent that transportation was a mere incident to the real transaction between defendants. … I feel that as expert witnesses they are qualified to testify on that subject.” This offer was not rejected by the court, but on the other hand, the court took the matter under advisement.

In re John's Will

30 Or. 494 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1896

moneys expended in maintaining schools shall be expended under the supervision of my executors as long as they shall continue to act, and until the trustees hereinafter mentioned and provided for shall be appointed and qualify … By the older English books it was established that, if an instrument be testamentary, and is to operate upon personal property, probate must be obtained, whatever its form, but that a will which clearly respects lands ought

In Re Am

227 Or. App. 216 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 1, 2009

Mother explained that he had recently received immunizations and that his unusual behavior was a side effect. The Criders returned to their residence in Oregon City with A; mother stayed at the apartment. … proved its case under ORS 419B.502, we do not discuss the court's findings or conclusions regarding ORS 419B.504 except to note that several of the allegations in the state's petition relevant to that statute were quite clearly

Easton v. Hurita

290 Or. 689 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1981

In the present case, defendant’s identity had not yet been satisfactorily established when the new information was received. … qualify for release without bail.”

LaBarge v. United Insurance

209 Or. 282 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1956

Combs, 76 F2d 775, declares: “All men do not possess like physical strength, immunity to disease, and resistance to senile degeneration. … It is always the burden of the insured to establish that the accidental trauma was the cause of his disability. In Hutchinson v. Aetna Life Ins.

Cai v. Multnomah County Assessor, Tc-Md 100205d (or.tax 1-11-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 11, 2011

Unfortunately, Plaintiff's repair/replacement bids were more than 18 months after the assessment date and did not clearly state whether the bids were to cure the problem or replace the siding. … Even though Plaintiff is familiar with his property, he did not qualify himself as an expert on valuation.