Case law

State v. Caraher

293 Or. 741 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 2, 1982

Brown was an easy case in that the cigarette box which the defendant surrendered to the jailer came from one of his pockets and therfore clearly fell within the classification of a search of the person and was a search incident … However, under some circumstances a handbag or purse might qualify under the looser language of the definition and be a “like” which is found about “such clothing.”

MT & M Gaming, Inc. v. City of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2016

Cite as 360 Or 544 (2016) 555 narrowing implication of the modifier “legal”: Any “interest” may qualify as long as it is “legally recognized.” … The foregoing history clearly shows that the requirement is a matter of general federal standing jurisprudence.

Neumann v. Liles

358 Or. 706 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 2016

Independent News, 298 Or 434, 437, 693 P2d 35, cert den, 474 US 826 (1985) (under qualified privilege of “fair comment and criticism,” a defendant is not liable if publication was made in good faith and without malice); Peck … Although the general tenor of the review reveals its hyperbolic nature more clearly than do the individual statements contained therein, several state- ments can be characterized as hyperbolic.

Wilson Whitney v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 30, 2012

Defendant filed an Answer disagreeing that Plaintiff qualified for innocent spouse relief. … If the following four conditions are met, the individual will qualify for innocent spouse relief.

Lee v. Oregon

869 F. Supp. 1491 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 27, 1994

A plaintiff invoking federal court jurisdiction must establish, at an irreducible constitutional minimum that: (1) they have suffered an “injury in fact” or an invasion of *1494 a legally-protected interest which is concrete … Section 4 of the Measure provides, in relevant part: (4) No health care provider shall be under any duty, whether by contract, by statute or by any other legal requirement to participate in the provision to a qualified patient

Harding v. US Figure Skating Ass'n

851 F. Supp. 1476 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 3, 1994

The hearing date established by defendant was not "reasonably convenient for all parties," as required by defendant's bylaws. … Defendant has an interest in enforcing its rules and promptly disciplining violators, and ensuring that only qualified skaters represent the United States at the World Championships.

State Ex Rel. Sisemore v. Standard Optical Co.

182 Or. 452 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1947

Therefore, if the competent practitioners were not clearly distinguished, the mass of the public would fall into the hands of quacks when their most fundamental needs were at stake. ’ ’ Eneyc. of the Social Sciences, vol. … In our opinion, the evidence established the fact that the defendant corporation, not being a licensed optometrist, has practiced optometry in the State of Oregon unlawfully.

Kerr Center Parents Ass'n Ex Rel. Richardson v. Charles

572 F. Supp. 448 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 6, 1983

The pur *453 pose of the agreement is to qualify the State for receipt of federal funds for special education pursuant to EAHCA. … Until the Oregon legislature provides such funds, or until it enacts legislation clearly placing the financing burdens upon the local school districts or upon the Lake Oswego School District, or until it resolves in some

Toohey v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp. Health & Welfare Plan

727 F. Supp. 2d 978 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 26, 2010

ERISA requires that every employee subject to a qualifying plan receive an SPD. 29 USC § 1022 (a). … Thus, in order to be awarded BTA benefits, plaintiffs must establish that the airplane was “leased” by WWC.

Clackamas County v. Gay

146 Or. App. 706 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 5, 1997

The language of the statute clearly did not limit reduction from the amount payable to situations in which the damages to the insured are less than the uninsured motorist policy amount. … Particularly in the light of the historical context in which ORS 174.010 was enacted, I think it is ill-advised for us to ignore or to qualify its terms; it was the very practice of courts rewriting and invalidating statutes

Starr v. Stark

22 F. Cas. 1116 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · May 8, 1874

But whether Coffin and Chapman are, or are not. the parties specially referred to. they are clearly embraced in the terms of covenant. … But Stark is a competent witness, also, and it is but fair to presume that if he could have Truthfully denied, or qualified in any material degree, the accuracy of the testimony given, he would have offered himself as an

Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. v. Bush

451 F. Supp. 2d 1215 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 7, 2006

Prior to determining whether the state secrets privilege requires dismissal of plaintiffs case, I first determine whether this information qualifies as a secret. Hepting, 439 F.Supp.2d at 986 ; El-Masri v. … Plaintiffs also argue that if the court rules that they may have access to the Sealed Document, such a decision is subject to judicial immunity.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Carstens

297 Or. 155 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 22, 1984

This court in In re Moynihan, 166 Or 200, 221 , 111 P2d 96 (1941) said: “The trial committee that heard the witnesses ‘is better qualified to determine disputed questions of facts than we who read the cold printed record’ … No course of conduct was established. The sixth cause of complaint is dismissed.

Schytz v. Yamhill County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 1, 2024

Payment of two-thirds of the tax qualifies for a two percent discount. ORS 311.505(3)(a). Payment of the full amount due on or before November 15 qualifies for a three percent discount. ORS 311.505(3)(b). … The court finds that Defendant’s determination is not capricious or clearly wrong.

Vesta Corp. v. Amdocs Management Ltd.

80 F. Supp. 3d 1152 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 13, 2015

B. 12(b)(6) Motion Regarding the Trade Secret Misappropriation Claim To establish a claim under Oregon’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act, ORS 646.460, a plaintiff must demonstrate that (1) the subject of the claim qualifies as … Identification of a Trade Secret Defendants argue that Plaintiff fails to clearly identify any specific information it shared with Defendants that qualifies for trade secret protection.

Morlan v. Qwest Dex, Inc.

332 F. Supp. 2d 1356 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 25, 2004

While plaintiff does not clearly set forth the statements upon which she relies, her briefing mentions the following statements and inferences: • Dodson told his boss at CMO, Mr. … More often, a defendant will argue that otherwise actionable statements qualify for a conditional (or, stated differently, qualified) privilege.

V. L. Y. v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision

338 Or. 44 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 10, 2005

The second clause establishes an objective criterion, viz., conviction (or its functional equivalent) of one or more specified sexually related offenses. … Clearly, the authorization to the board to “use” a risk assessment scale approved by the department does not transmogrify that policy choice.

Hall v. Russell

11 F. Cas. 248 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Nov 12, 1875

Under section 4 of the donation act, Lor-ing was qualified to take 320 acres of the public land in Oregon. … But this is clearly not so. The language of the section is open to criticism, but the manifest intention of congress was to grant the premises occupied by the deceased-settler to his heirs.

Heise v. Pilot Rock Lumber Co.

222 Or. 78 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 25, 1960

In any event, they are clearly not tenable. Does the complaint state a cause of suit or action? … Lucas et ux., 193 Or 401, 410 , 238 P2d 780 , the necessary elements of an action at law for fraud are clearly set forth.

Burgdorfer v. Thielemann

153 Or. 354 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1936

One of the reasons leading to this conclusion is that the purpose of such oral testimony is not to establish an agreement, but to prove fraud. … that in this action, where all the facts are alleged, and it is charged in effect that the defendant fraudulently prevented the consummation of the original contract in order to deprive plaintiff of his commission, it was clearly