Case law

Moore v. Schermerhorn

210 Or. 23 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 20, 1957

Brown v. Miles, 193 Or 466 , 238 P2d 761 , is not controlling. … In the case of State Land Board v.

Hawley v. Hawley

43 Or. 352 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1903

Brown. … Kiernan, 23 Or. 455 ( 32 Pac. 158 ); Cooper v. Thomason, 30 Or. 161 ( 45 Pac. 296 ). Instead of pursuing this course, the legal title was secured by Mrs. Brown in an attempt to defeat Mrs. Hawley’s equity ; but, as Mrs.

Pham v. Thompson

156 Or. App. 440 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 7, 1998

Penrod/Brown v. Cupp, 283 Or 21, 28 , 581 P2d 934 (1978); Sager v. Board of Parole, 121 Or App 607, 612-13 , 856 P2d 329 , rev den 318 Or 170 (1993). … In Nelson v.

Branton v. Oregon State Penitentiary

89 Or. App. 597 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 24, 1988

In State v. … The only change in the law since State v. Brown, 297 Or 404 , 687 P2d 751 (1984), which we cited in our former opinion, is emphasized in the above quote.

State v. Lyons

124 Or. App. 598 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 17, 1993

In Brown , the Supreme Court examined the peak of tension test for general acceptance within the field of polygraphy. State v. Brown, 297 Or at 422-25 . … See State v. Brown, supra, 297 Or at 427 .

Property Management Services, Inc. v. PMC Village Inn, Ltd.

91 Or. App. 225 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 18, 1988

Broyles v. Brown, supra, 295 Or at 801 . … Broyles v. Brown, supra, 295 Or at 801 . Applying those standards, we hold that defendant had no “probable cause” for taking this appeal.

State v. Wehr

275 Or. App. 528 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 16, 2015

See ORAP 5.45(1) (authorizing review of errors apparent on the record); State v. Brown, 310 Or 347, 355 , 800 P2d 259 (1990) (identifying requirements for plain error). … State v. Brown, 272 Or App 321, 324-25 , 355 P3d 129 (2015). In that case, the defendant was not “actively instrumental” in bringing about the error.

Duerst v. Limbocker

269 Or. 252 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 1, 1974

Even assuming that the court can render a statute irrational by force of its own remolding of court-made law, Brown v. … Oviatt, 520 P2d 883 (Utah 1974); Keasling v. Thompson, 217 NW2d 687 (Iowa 1974). See also Delaney v. Badame, 49 I112d 168, 274 NE2d 353 (1971). ⑤ In Brown v.

State v. Calderon

67 Or. App. 169 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 7, 1984

Citing State v. … That argument was answered adversely to defendant’s contention in State v. Turner, 296 Or 451 , 676 P2d 873 (1984), and State v. Brown, 296 Or 458 , 676 P2d 877 (1984).

Kankkonen v. HENDRICKSON

232 Or. 49 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 6, 1962

State Land Board v. Gennies, 204 Or 443 , 283 P2d 655 (1955). The other is that “a thing once proved to exist continued as long as is usual with things of that nature.” ORS 41.360 (32). … Fink v. Prudential Insurance Co., 162 Or 37 , 90 P2d 762 (1939).

Balfour v. Portland & Asiatic S. S. Co.

167 F. 1010 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 8, 1909

The case of Nobel’s Explosives Co. v. Jenkins, L. R. 1896, 2 Q. B. 326, cited by the Supreme Court, is also quite analogous. … But this argument is disposed of by the cases of (Geipel v. Smith. L. R. 7 Q. B. 404, and Rodoconachi v. Elliott, L. R. 9 C. P. 518.

Vanbebber v. Plunkett

27 L.R.A. 811 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1895

J., in Brown v. Oregon Lumber Company, 24 Or. 317 , 33 Pac. 557 , “is in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence; it admits not only all that the evidence proves, but all that it tends to prove. … Shattuck, J., in Tippin v.

Wilson v. Saint Helens School Dist. 29J

335 Or. App. 695 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 30, 2024

Moreover, a board order must be supported by “substantial reason.” Taylor v. SAIF, 295 Or App 199, 203, 433 P3d 419 (2018), rev den, 365 Or 194 (2019). … On review, claimant argues that our decision in Sullivan v.

Walker v. Providence Health System Oregon

254 Or. App. 676 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 30, 2013

“We review the board’s decision for substantial evidence and errors of law, and to determine whether the board’s analysis comports with substantial reason.” SAIF v. Ramos, 252 Or App 361, 363 , 287 P3d 1220 (2012). … Providence Health System v. Walker, 252 Or App 489 , 289 P3d 256 (2012) (Walker II).

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

297 Or. App. 704 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 22, 2019

We agree with claimant that the board erred by not adequately explaining the basis for the attorney fee award. "Orders of the board must be supported by substantial reason." Taylor v. SAIF , 295 Or. … App. at 203 , 433 P.3d 419 ; see also Schoch v.

City of Salem v. Stadeli

327 Or. App. 396 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 9, 2023

On judicial review, this court reversed the board’s order. SAIF v. Thompson, 267 Or App 356, 340 P3d 163 (2014), rev’d, 360 Or 155, 379 P3d 494 (2016). … v.

Fred Meyer Stores - Kroger Co. v. Anderson

344 Or. App. 60 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 8, 2025

Co. v. … As we explained in Valtinson v.

State v. Grenvik

48 Or. App. 939 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 27, 1980

Defendant makes an additional argument not raised in State v. Annino, supra. Defendant entered his plea of guilty on May 3,1977, prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Multnomah County Dist. … These provisions were declared unconstitutional in Brown v. Multnomah County Dist. Ct. supra.

State v. Beltran-Chavez

286 Or. App. 590 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 6, 2017

See State v. … State v.

Rogue Gem & Geology Club, Inc. v. Josephine County Assessor

17 Or. Tax 446 · Oregon Tax Court · Jun 10, 2003

Sue Brown, past-president of Plaintiff, appeared for Plaintiff. Michael Schneyder, Assessor, appeared for Defendant Department of Revenue (the department). … Methodist Homes, Inc. v. Tax Com., 226 Or 298, 308-09 , 360 P2d 293 (1961) (citing Behnke-Walker v. Multnomah County, 173 Or 510, 519 , 146 P2d 614 (1944)).