Case law

State v. Miller

347 Or. App. 145 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 19, 2026

On appeal, defendant argues that the testimony was not relevant for the purposes the state identified because H did not delay reporting and because “the prior contacts were not clearly sexual in nature.” … have engaged 2 At trial, the state noted that we had essentially already determined, in Williams, that the evidence was admissible scientific evidence and that the expert the state called at trial, Schumann, was qualified

Soda Mountain Wilderness Council v. United States Bureau of Land Management

945 F. Supp. 2d 1162 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 10, 2013

The Monument was established by presidential proclamation in 2000 and is currently 58,000 acres. … The RMP, which qualifies as a current plan, clearly requires that harvesting “[m]eet the 40 percent minimum throughout the Matrix with per-acre requirements met on average areas no larger than 40 acres.” AR 20088.

Oberg v. Honda Motor Co.

316 Or. 263 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 20, 1993

Those terms appear in the two preceding constitutional provisions, where they clearly refer only to crimes. … The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides in part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any

State v. T. T.

308 Or. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 6, 2021

Evidence of the odor of marijuana generally Previously, we have rejected arguments that non- qualified testimony about the smell of marijuana would fail to establish reasonable suspicion. … Vermont concluded that the weight of testimony about a smell of marijuana is strongly tied to testimony qualifying that smell.

Portland General Electric Co. v. Ebasco Services, Inc.

353 Or. 849 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2013

To be sure, that conclusion is a qualified one. … As dictated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, it is well established that the state may not deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without “notice and opportunity

Hardt v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 26, 2024

Hardt "has a compromised immune system and no longer feels comfortable entering" the business where a worker contracted the disease. Id. … However, these alleged facts are insufficient to establish that the law and facts clearly favor plaintiffs' position.

City of Wood Village v. Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission

48 Or. App. 79 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 2, 1980

The adoption of its staff’s proposal does *90 not establish that the agency failed to perform its proper function here. … They indicated that they listened to the tapes, examined all the relevant evidence and felt qualified to vote on the matter.

Potts

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 13, 2026

To qualify for in forma pauperis status, a civil litigant must demonstrate that the litigant is unable to pay court fees. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); O’Loughlin, 920 F.2d at 617. … A Court must also 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. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Evergreen Aviation & Space Museum v. Yamhill County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Aug 27, 2012

The issue before the court is whether the use made of the subject property qualifies for exemption under the statute. … While this list is not exclusive, “[t]he savings must be clearly evident.” OAR 150-307.112(9).

In re Graeff

368 Or. 18 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 22, 2021

The Bar must establish mis- conduct by clear and convincing evidence, BR 5.2, which is “evidence establishing that the truth of the facts asserted is highly probable,” In re Kirchoff, 361 Or 712, 714, 399 P3d 453 (2017) ( … However, the Bar does not argue that the record establishes that respondent committed that crime.

State v. Craigen

370 Or. 696 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 19, 2023

Governments, both state and fed- eral, quite properly spend vast sums of money to establish machinery to try defendants accused of crime. … This court restated that framing clearly and repeatedly throughout the opinion.

Halbasch v. Med-Data, Inc.

192 F.R.D. 641 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 16, 2000

Clearly, this is a classic jury question of which witnesses were the most credible on the issue. The verdict is not against the clear weight of the evidence. B. … The statute requires defendant to “establish” the measures taken.

Lake Oswego Preservation Society v. City of Lake Oswego

Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 2016

Thus, although “[t]he legislature knows how to include qualifying language in a statute when it wants to do so,” PGE v. … First, the owner must establish that it was the owner of the property at the time that it was designated. Second, it must establish that the designation was “imposed” on the property by the local government.

State v. Harris

288 Or. 703 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1980

The statement "our records reveal this order was in full effect on 4-30-78” is clearly an out-of-court statement that was offered to prove the truth of the fact stated and is thus hearsay evidence. … No reason is suggested by the state why the same rule should not apply to "summaries” of entries in public records other than possible inconvenience of producing a witness qualified to give such testimony.

National Labor Relations Board v. State of Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 27, 2021

.2 This Court will not conclude without further evidence that answering inquiries that are clearly within the scope of NLRB’s service functions should be deemed an injury sufficient to establish standing. 2 For the reasons … Molasky-Arman involved an out-of-state insurance agent’s challenge to a Nevada law brought under the Privilege and Immunities Clause of Article IV and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. 522 F.3d 925, 931

Springwater Env. v. Clackamas County, Tc-Md 100196d (or.tax 2-17-2011)

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 17, 2011

There is no dispute that Plaintiff meets the statutory requirements of a qualifying organization operating a charter school in a leased facility owned by an exempt body, the Oregon City School District. … Plaintiff must establish its claim "by a preponderance of the evidence, or the more convincing or greater weight of evidence." Schaefer v. Dept. of Rev ., TC No 4530 at 4 (July 12, 2001) (citing Feves v.

Parkerson v. Young

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 20, 2022

immunity. … Claim 1: Establishment Clause The Establishment Clause “prohibits the enactment of a law or official policy that establishes a religion or religious faith, or tends to do so.”

Independent Living Resources v. Oregon Arena Corp.

1 F. Supp. 2d 1124 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 26, 1998

By contrast, “handicapped” parking spaces are reserved solely for qualifying motorists and fines are imposed upon violators. … They have not established their case.

Stevens v. Bispham

316 Or. 221 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 13, 1993

Assume finally that it developed subsequently that the attorney had not investigated the facts or the law and was clearly wrong in his advice. … Here, he legally was exonerated by a means that qualifies as “otherwise.”

Koch v. City of Portland

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 30, 2021

If a local government body chooses to establish such a telephone line, Oregon Revised Statute 297.765 establishes some mandatory procedures. … “In defense to an action for defamation, Oregon recognizes two forms of privilege: absolute and qualified.