Case law

State v. Branstetter

181 Or. App. 57 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 24, 2002

to ‘transfer [m] what was clearly intended as a civil remedy into a criminal penalty[.]’ ” Hudson, 522 US at 99 (some citations omitted). … This is something that we’ve established outside of this hearing.”

Watson v. Banducci

158 Or. App. 223 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 3, 1999

If those terms clearly express the easement’s purpose, our analysis ends. Tipperman v. Tsiastsos, 327 Or 539, 544-45 , 964 P2d 1015 (1998); Kell, 154 Or App at 426 . … As earlier discussed, an easement is, by definition, a private right of way unless otherwise qualified.

New Beginnings Christian Center Inc v. Multnomah County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 13, 2014

Brutke was an appeal from a disqualification during which the plaintiffs provided additional information establishing that their property qualified for special assessment. … The subject property qualified for exemption under ORS 307.140 in tax year 2006, and remained qualified throughout the years at issue.

Northwest Success, Inc. v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 7, 2026

“It is a basic principle of due process that an enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined.” Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972); see also U.S. CONST. amend. … As discussed above, the use of the qualifying words “immediate” and “prompt” sufficiently cabins the establishment of the time limitations to avoid arbitrary enforcement.

Kazlauskas v. KBBP, LLC

248 Or. App. 555 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 14, 2012

This document shall clearly spell out our percentages of participation as to make clear to any party acting on either of our behalves. … Furthermore, Emmert asserted, any qualifying “part performance” must be clearly referable to the contract, and Kazlauskas’s conduct did not meet that standard.

Kuhnhausen v. Stadelman

174 Or. 290 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1944

It is a firmly established rule in this state that in actions for malicious prosecution the question of probable cause is a question of law which the judge must decide upon established or conceded facts. … He need only establish his case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Cooke v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 3, 2014

The ledgers clearly identify the “time in,” “time out,” “hours,” and “total” for each day that child care was provided. (Id.) Weekly payments are identified by the amount and the notation “Pd.” (Id.) … Plaintiffs have the burden of proof and must establish their case by a “preponderance” of the evidence. ORS 305.427.

Yamaha Store of Bend, Oregon, Inc. v. Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A.

310 Or. 333 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 20, 1990

No such clearly defined market areas are involved here. … We believe that by using the qualifier “further” in ORS 646.160, the legislature intended that insofar as possible any additional damages must be compensatory damages designed to restore a plaintiff to the place he or she

Quail Hollow West Owners Ass'n v. Brownstone Quail Hollow, LLC

206 Or. App. 321 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 2006

Even if that were so, it would not be sufficient to establish that the association is the real party in interest. … The Restatement of Property section 5, comment c (1936), likewise refers to an “interest in land or other thing” as “rights, privileges, powers, and immunities with regard to specific land.”

Friends of Columbia Gorge, Inc. v. Columbia River Gorge Commission

346 Or. 366 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 16, 2009

The Act itself establishes a framework and a process for developing the contemplated management plan. … The Act clearly contains gaps that the commission is charged with filling.

Riverview Condominium Ass'n v. Cypress Ventures, Inc.

266 Or. App. 574 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 29, 2014

Alternatively, Morse argued that he was immune from personal liability because all of his actions were taken in his capacity as a corporate officer. … That contention is clearly incorrect in the light of Beveridge and Taylor .

State Ex Rel. Overhulse v. Appling

226 Or. 575 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1961

In the event that a legislator does not qualify under this resolution for reimbursement for legislative expenses for an entire calendar month, or if the Legislative Assembly was in session for part of a calendar month, the … There are infinite gradations which span the spectrum of purposes from the clearly personal to the clearly legislative.

State v. McClure

256 Or. App. 200 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 17, 2013

It merely extends the statute beyond ‘behavior clearly intended to prevent being taken into custody’ to behavior intended to resist custodial status after a person is taken into custody. *** The legislature defined arrest … Section 7 of the bill established a task force to study the arrest authority of parole and probation officers over nonsupervised persons.

Huffman v. Alexander

197 Or. 283 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1952

The attempt of the plaintiff to establish that the recitals in the judicial record were false, fraudulent and malicious must fail. … These two cases establish the constitutional right of a prisoner to the type of appeal generally afforded.

Phoenix Electric Co. v. National Electrical Contractors Ass'n

867 F. Supp. 925 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 9, 1994

They also assert that, if Section 2 requires that a single defendant possess the requisite market power, ONECA qualifies as the monopolist. These arguments fail for two reasons. … Plaintiffs contend that the OJTP was not established through collective bargaining.

Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Communications Workers

199 F. Supp. 689 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 31, 1961

Both parties concede that the suspension of Johnson was a “grievance” which qualified for processing under the rules of procedure outlined in Article 6. … management and that it is the duty of the Court to direct arbitration on unresolved issues between those parties, where there is a broad arbitration clause,, and unless the particular issue has been specifically excluded or is clearly

Phelps v. Wyeth, Inc.

938 F. Supp. 2d 1055 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 2, 2013

Phelps’ doctors are qualified to render opinions on causation in this case. Thus the issue is whether the experts in this case have testified that causation was probable or merely possible. … Clearly Dr. Lockfeld had not only diagnosed her with tardive dyskinesia, but believed that her tardive dyskinesia was caused by metoclopramide. Additionally, Dr. Peterson testified she diagnosed Mrs.

Burt v. Blumenauer

299 Or. 55 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 23, 1985

4 If the latter, was *64 it “clearly and unmistakenly” authorized by statute? … Suggested analyses of the limits of government speech range from an interpretation of the First Amendment as containing an implied prohibition against political establishment, similar to the express prohibition against establishment

McCall v. Legislative Assembly

291 Or. 663 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 23, 1981

The 1952 amendment of Article IV, section 6, vested original jurisdiction in this court, upon the petition of any qualified elector, to determine whether a reapportionment made by the legislature or by the Secretary of State … is true of many other areas of the state besides the old Senate District 5, some of them containing tens of thousands of residents. 8 This effect of redistricting creates no unconstitutional grant of equal privileges or immunities

Namba v. McCourt and Neuner

185 Or. 579 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1948

And the legislative assembly shall have power to restrain and regulate the Immigration to this state of persons not qualified to become citizens of the United States.” … Clearly, the provision just quoted sought to restrict the ownership of Oregon land to white aliens eligible to citizenship. Terrace v.