Case law

Osborn ex rel. Petit v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

160 F. Supp. 3d 1238 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 11, 2016

Here, Section 9.2 clearly grants MetLife discretion to determine eligibility for benefits under the Participating Life and AD & D Insurance Plan. … One of the issues before the court in Gomez was whether the plaintiffs accident policy qualified as life insurance under RCW 48.11.020 or disability insurance under RCW 48.11.030. See id. at 1155.

Coos County Assessor v. Department of Revenue

18 Or. Tax 334 · Oregon Tax Court · Feb 6, 2004

If that information, together with the information in the petition and that provided by the county in response to the department’s request form, clearly established that the requirements of the statute and rule were met, … As for the representation issue, Carmichael filed the petition and he is a qualified representative under ORS 305.230.

State v. Montigue

288 Or. 359 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1980

One who qualifies as the latter type of individual, sometimes referred to as a `citizen-informer,' is more deserving of a presumption of reliability than the informant from the criminal milieu." … In some of the state court cases cited by the majority for the above mentioned rule such data clearly appears. In State v. Drake, 224 N.W.2d 476 (Iowa 1974) the crime was receiving and concealing stolen goods.

GTE Northwest Inc. v. Public Utility Commission

321 Or. 458 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 24, 1995

LECs provide basic telecommunications services within geographic boundaries established by the PUC. See id. at § (18) (defining LECs). … The cases cited above establish a bright-line rule: that an agency may not act in eminent domain without an express grant of power from the legislature.

Antoine v. Taylor

368 Or. 760 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 24, 2021

In that case, the petitioner had been sentenced under ORS 137.635, a statute mandating determinate sen- tences when the defendant had qualifying prior convictions. Id. at 493-94. … In short, petitioner has identified no decision avail- able to trial counsel that clearly held that a demurrer was not an appropriate mechanism to raise a statutory or con- stitutional challenge to the sufficiency of pretrial

Cocina Cultura LLC v. State of Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 7, 2020

Defendant The Contingent offered to post a bond with this Court equaling “the maximum grant for which plaintiff would have qualified if it were otherwise eligible to receive funds” ($42,985.00), “plus one year’s worth of … Plaintiff’s interests are protected by The Contingent’s deposit of monies from the Fund into the Court’s registry and the Defendants’ representation that sovereign immunity will not interfere with any future dispersal

Devlin v. Moore

64 Or. 433 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1913

Defendants submit that the following propositions are established: (1) That all of the indebtedness of the Oregon Trust & Savings Bank has been paid and discharged; (2) that there are no stockholders for the receiver to represent … He did not qualify, and never acted as such director, except to meet informally with the officers while he had a real estate office in the bank building.

State v. Brown

262 Or. 442 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 24, 1972

Oregon has not been immune. … The legislature clearly intended two separate and distinct crimes.

Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Columbia River

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.

Patton v. Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance

238 Or. App. 101 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 20, 2010

The court concluded: “The reasons for limiting recovery to the amount actually expended for repair or replacement seem reasonable, and such limitations should be enforced if it is clearly stated in the insurance contract. … However, Smith also consistently qualified those statements by reminding plaintiff that his right to replacement-cost coverage was subject to the conditions and terms of the policy, including the requirement that construction

Bohner v. Daniels

243 F. Supp. 2d 1171 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 6, 2003

As to Subsection (A), it has already been established that the 1997 rule was not an interpretive rule or a general statement of policy. Gunderson, 268 F.3d at 1154 ; Grier, 46 Fed.Appx. at 440 . … An agency may rely upon harmless error “only when a mistake of the administrative body is one that clearly had no bearing on the procedure used or the substance of the decision reached.”

State v. Gortmaker

60 Or. App. 723 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 15, 1982

The other is that it is the only practicable method for enforcing the right of qualified Negroes to serve on grand juries.” 339 US at 300 . … At the time of that order, defendant had established a practice of selecting confiscated guns for a collection that he maintained.

Christensen II v. Dept. of Rev.

23 Or. Tax 155 · Oregon Tax Court · Sep 7, 2018

Although this right to information is limited in scope, the court concludes that the department clearly vio- lated it in this case. … To qualify for injunctive relief, the claimant must demonstrate that there is a cognizable threat of continuing harm stemming from conduct that is probable or threat- ened. Eagles Five, LLC v.

Jones v. Mitchell Bros. Truck Lines

266 Or. 513 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1973

Our attention has not been called to any evidence which is in direct conflict with any established physical fact. … The truck did not present any hazard and did not block either lane of traffic, and was clearly visible to everyone in its position by the highway.

State v. Folkes

174 Or. 568 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1944

But it is clearly distinguishable. … In the case at bar, the making and the authenticity of the confessions is established beyond any reasonable doubt.

Twigg v. Admiral Ins. Co.

324 Or. App. 259 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 2023

They contended that the defective construc- tion work qualified as an “occurrence” or accident under the relevant insurance policy. … “[T]he facts proved at trial on which liability is established may give rise to a duty to indemnify if the insured’s conduct is covered.” Id. at 403.

State v. Agee

358 Or. 325 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 3, 2015

Because neither party has made a developed legal argument about the scope of Article I, section 16, and because the Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence clearly prohibits the execution of intellectually disabled … Hulteng testified that, in his opinion, a person with an IQ score of over 75 could never qualify as intellectually disabled. Specifically with respect to this case, Dr. Hulteng and Dr. 

1000 Friends v. Land Conservation & Development Commission

301 Or. 447 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 12, 1986

built” exception to Goal 3 or 4 “obviously” differs from the same kind of exception to Goal 14 because *480 “an area can be lightly developed in such a way that agriculture is rendered impracticable but the land may still qualify … Second, the county does not clearly define what it considers to be the line between “urban” and “rural” levels of services.

Thompson ex rel. Thorpe Family Charitable Remainder Unitrust v. Federico

324 F. Supp. 2d 1152 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 8, 2004

At the outset, the court rejects defendants’ position that there are no material issues of fact regarding whether plaintiff clearly instructed Federico to sell the Trust’s equity holdings. … Evidence qualifies as “clear and convincing” when the “ ‘truth of the facts asserted is highly probable.’ ” Simpson v.

Berlant v. U.S. Department of Commerce

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 30, 2024

Complying with these requirements, Defendants have submitted, under penalty of perjury, a detailed declaration from a qualified individual, Dana S. … To qualify as confidential, the receiving party may also have had to provide “some assurance that it will remain secret.” Argus Leader, 588 U.S. at 434.