Case law

State v. Azar

318 Or. App. 724 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 6, 2022

ORS 164.015, thus, describes the different categories of conduct that qualify as theft. … That hypothetical, the majority posits, demon- strates that the legislature clearly intended to broaden the scope of the statute to, well, fencing.

State v. J. C. N.-V.

Oregon Supreme Court · May 26, 2016

and maturity” determination of ORS 419C.349(3) as one of many considerations going to the discretionary “best interest of the youth and of society” determination required by ORS 419C.349(4), rather than—as the legislature clearly … However, focusing on the qualifying word “sufficient,” and the object of the under- standing, the “nature and quality” of the conduct, the state contends that the statute requires no more than an adult- like mental grasp

Disability Rights Oregon v. Washington County

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 27, 2025

Judge Beckerman also recommended denying the motion to make more definite and certain, finding that nothing in the complaint is so indefinite as to make the nature of the claims unclear and that plaintiffs clearly intended … The County next argues that the F&R wrongly concludes that plaintiffs established but-for causation, again arguing that the F&R wrongfully conflates mental health emergencies and physical health emergencies and fails to

State v. Johnson

340 Or. 319 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 30, 2006

However, and assuming that the first incident that Robinson described even qualifies as a “prior bad act,” it is clear that it was relevant to other facts at issue in the case. … In the present case, the trial court clearly recognized the foregoing distinction.

Rowden v. Hogan Woods, LLC

306 Or. App. 658 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 30, 2020

Nothing in the record clearly establishes that the “right to occupancy” of Unit 112 at Hogan Woods is lim- ited to employees by virtue of their work at Hogan Woods. … First, the majority opinion observes, “Nothing in the record clearly establishes that the ‘right to occupancy’ of Unit 112 at Hogan Woods is limited to employees by virtue of their work at Hogan Woods.” 306 Or App at 674.

State v. J. C. N.-V.

Oregon Supreme Court · May 26, 2016

Thus, under the 1985 statute, youths who were 14 at the time of an act remained immune from criminal pros- ecution. … However, focusing on the qualifying word “sufficient,” and the object of the under- standing, the “nature and quality” of the conduct, the state simplicity” or “worldly-wise, knowing.”

McLean v. State Industrial Accident Commission

189 Or. 405 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1950

C. 1930, 49-1815, defining hazardous occupations, after the usual enumeration, added the words “and all occupations for which rates are expressly established by section 49-1825 ”. … Defendant assumes correctly that the National Guard is a department of the state and that the sovereign immunity from suit applies.

Drake v. City of Portland

172 Or. 558 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1943

Therefore, the respondents say that all of the thirty-three employee parties are qualified to perform the work of Senior Account Clerk, Account Clerk and Junior Clerk. … Clearly, the challenged order was not intended to lessen the seniority of anyone who was in the city’s *599 employ October 26, 1938.

City of Mosier v. Hood River Sand, Gravel & Ready-Mix, Inc.

206 Or. App. 292 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 2006

ORS chapter 197 establishes a general policy of land use planning throughout the state and clearly applies to both cities and counties. … According to HRSG, those experts, consultants, and workers used the road to get to and from the quarry site, and that use should be regarded as sufficiently related to the mining operations to qualify as “continuing” the

Scott v. United States

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 19, 2025

An exception to “this broad waiver of sovereign immunity [is] called the discretionary function exception[.]” Id. … United States, 973 F.2d 696, 702 (9th Cir. 1992)). /// The Supreme Court has established a two-step analysis for determining the applicability of

State v. Ferman-Velasco

333 Or. 422 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 28, 2002

A defendant who could not establish one of those strictly defined legal reasons nonetheless would “frequently address[ ] the court in mitigation of his conduct * * * [and] cast[ ] himself upon their mercy.” … That is so, because ORS 161.665(1) specifically excludes from the exception those expenses associated with payment of court-appointed counsel — expenses that clearly are associated with the right to assistance of counsel,

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Swift Transportation Co.

45 F. Supp. 2d 1036 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 14, 1999

favor of the plaintiff on her race discrimination claim and awarded compensatory damages; the district court declined to submit the issue of punitive damages to the jury and the Ninth Circuit affirmed: “While the record clearly … Plaintiff filed an action alleging that the employer deliberately set the qualifications for the set-up position in such a manner that it effectively eliminated all women from the pool of qualified applicants.

Daniels v. Taylor

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 26, 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 … Should plaintiff file an Amended Complaint curing the substantive deficiencies noted below, the Court advises plaintiff to clearly identify all intended defendants in the caption thereof. II.

State v. Le

327 Or. App. 129 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 19, 2023

. “* * * * * “The context within which these activities took place leave no doubt that the purpose of his physical touching does qualify as sexual contact under the statute.” … “An abuse of discretion occurs when a court exer- cises its discretion to an end not justified by, and clearly against, evidence and reason.” State v.

Costco Wholesale Corp. v. City of Beaverton

206 Or. App. 380 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 14, 2006

City of Beaverton, 50 Or LUBA 476, 484-85 (2005) (emphasis in original); 7 see also id. at 501 (Holstun, concurring) (“[T]here is nothing in ORS 222.750 that prohibits a city from identifying a territory that qualifies for … Petitioners assert that the city failed to establish the validity of some of the predicate “encircling” annexations and, thus, failed to establish as a factual matter that petitioners’ properties were “surrounded” under any

State v. Nebeker

350 Or. App. 357 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 10, 2026

The fact that a statement qualifies as an excited utterance—and consequently is admissible as a matter of state law governing hearsay—does not exempt it from Confrontation Clause protection. State v. … For example, structured interrogations taking place at the police station and eliciting recorded statements about events that occurred in the past are clearly testimonial. Crawford, 54 US at 51-53, 65-69.

TPC, LLC v. Water Resources Dept.

308 Or. App. 177 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 30, 2020

filed a limited motion to inter- vene for the purpose of bringing a motion to dismiss for fail- ure to join the Tribes in the petitions as a necessary and indispensable party that cannot be joined due to its sover- eign immunity … The Hyde Agreement qualifies as a rotation agree- ment pursuant to ORS 540.150 and OAR 690-250-0080. “5. As a contract signed by the agency, the Hyde Agreement is a final order as defined in ORS 183.310(6)(b).

Murray v. Wiley

169 Or. 381 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1942

The evidence clearly establishes the intimate relationship which existed between all of the purchasing defendants in this and previous transactions. Watters acted for all, and all were represented by the same attorney. … Murray showed up and took up the equity of redemption prior to 5:00 o ’clock, that was decisive. ’ ’ The record clearly establishes from the testimony of the defendants themselves that they were possessed of information sufficient

Plumbers Joint Apprenticeship & Journeyman Training Committee v. Rosen (In Re Rosen)

179 B.R. 935 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Feb 9, 1995

Although the debtor clearly owes a debt to the plaintiff, see 11 U.S.C. § 101 (12), the debtor contends that it cannot be within the scope of section 523(a)(8) because it is not a debt for an educational benefit overpayment … Given the debtor’s wrist injury and lack of training or experience that would qualify him for a well-paying job, I find that the debtor’s reliance upon his worker’s compensation benefits was a reasonable effort to obtain

Hazell v. Brown

352 Or. 455 · Oregon Supreme Court · Oct 4, 2012

7 "* * * * * 8 "We think that it takes little imagination to see how many political 9 contributions constitute expression. 10 _______________ 11 12 "10 We qualify … 11 circumstances to determine whether and to what extent the conduct of giving or spending 12 political money itself constitutes a protected expression. 13 Some campaign expenditures might readily qualify