Case law

Brown v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 26, 2023

Because she did not establish presumptive disability at step three, the ALJ continued to evaluate how plaintiff’s impairments affected her ability to work. … Jan. 16, 2020) (doctor’s opinion that the claimant had certain “problems” did not qualify as a concrete functional imitation). Nor do Mr.

State v. McMillin

291 Or. App. 707 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 16, 2018

Glaspey , 337 Or. 558 , 563, 100 P.3d 730 (2004), the Supreme Court established the analytical framework to determine, for purposes of ORS 161.067(2), who are the victims of a crime. … App. 389 , 160 P.3d 1013 (2007), as follows: "Where the statute defining a crime does not expressly identify the person who qualifies as a 'victim,' the court examines the statute to identify the gravamen of the crime and

Utsey v. Coos County

176 Or. App. 524 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 26, 2001

Likewise, in Erwin , a decision on the merits concerning the validity of various rules of the Oregon State Bar clearly would have affected the Bar, yet we dismissed the plaintiff's claims because he could not establish that … Clearly, the legislature may not alter the requirements necessary to establish the constitutional aspects of justiciability—adversity, ripeness, and a lack of mootness.

State v. Dennis

177 Or. 73 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1945

On the other hand, it is quite clearly established that the wife is a competent witness, and that her testimony may properly be received and considered unless objected to on the ground of privilege. … This assignment is clearly insufficient. It sets forth no objection or motion by the defendant, and no ruling of the trial court.

Curto v. International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union

107 F. Supp. 805 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 2, 1952

The union card does not entitle any defendant to immunity for the results of acts of physical violence. The jury spoke for the public here. The result is reasonable and must be sustained. … The party himself may have been misinformed, he may not have clearly expressed his meaning, or the witness may have misunderstood him.

Aguilar-Padilla v. Boydstun Equipment Manufacturing, LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 21, 2024

See Tortu, 556 F.3d at 1085 (denying the defendant’s Rule 59 motion because the defendant raised his qualified immunity argument for the first time in post-trial motions, and it was a “legal matter [that] c[ould] not be … “We must uphold the jury’s finding unless the amount is grossly excessive or monstrous, clearly not supported by the evidence, or based only on speculation or guesswork.” Del Monte Dunes v.

United States v. Scheurer

55 F. Supp. 243 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 20, 1944

Also, it is so established that the court made no such finding. … It is established that he said he would not fight against Germans on German soil.

In Re Reinstatement of Gunter

344 Or. 368 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 27, 2008

Even if we accept those claims at face value, they do not establish that applicant was compelled to file for bankruptcy by any extraordinary hardship. … The expenses that come with raising a family generally do not qualify as an unusual misfortune. They are a necessary burden that everyone who chooses to raise a family knows that they must bear.

Gordon v. Oregon Board of Parole

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 7, 2025

An “unreasonable application” of clearly established federal law occurs if the state court correctly identifies the governing legal principle but misapplies that principle to the facts at hand. … Rather, the state court’s application of clearly established federal law must be objectively unreasonable.

State v. Thompson

328 Or. 248 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1999

The court explained that defendant was being well represented by qualified attorneys and that he had not given the court sufficient grounds to change his counsel. … On review, defendant argues that, “Clearly, the prosecutor misconstrued defendant’s statement, and apparently his accompanying gestures, for his own benefit.”

Columbia Riverkeeper v. Clatsop County

238 Or. App. 439 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 3, 2010

That term would clearly encompass construction of powerlines and gas pipelines. … In other management units, where resource values are conserved or not immunized from development effects, alterations of the estuary that produce significant impacts are allowed.

MacEwan v. HOLM

226 Or. 27 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1961

It, therefore, directed that body to bring to its aid as an advisory committee five persons "who because of their training and experience are qualified to advise" the Board in such matters. … From the foregoing, it must be noticed that the trial court had before it a man who admitted he was not qualified to properly analyze the effect of the radioactive fallout data gathered, either upon plants or people, but

Columbia Riverkeeper v. Columbia Cnty.

297 Or. App. 628 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 22, 2019

The county looked to OAR 660-004-0022(3), as noted, a rule establishing particular exception requirements for the siting of industrial development on rural resource land. … That advantage clearly extends to the import/export operation as a whole.

Nguyen v. Columbia River People's Utility District

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 15, 2023

EXTENSION OF DEADLINES The Court expects the parties to meet all established deadlines. … If there are numerous contested exhibits, they shall be placed in a binder clearly marked as Plaintiff or Defendant’s exhibits.

Tucker v. Oregon Aero, Inc.

474 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 1, 2007

Despite extensive briefing by both parties, the precise terms of the oral agreement, other than the compensation provided under the oral argument, are not clearly established in the summary judgement record. … Clearly, on this record, there is a disputed issue of fact regarding the contribution plaintiff made to the patents.

State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. S.P.

346 Or. 592 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 13, 2009

ORS 418.783 establishes the CAMI program as a part of the Department of Justice. … In Davis, the Court cited Bourjaily as a case in which “the statements at issue were clearly nontestimonial.” Davis, 547 US at 825 .

Carey v. United Airlines, Inc.

77 F. Supp. 2d 1165 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 8, 1999

Plaintiff believed he had no choice but to send his daughter back to her seat even though she was clearly in pain and was in tears. Plaintiff asked Jachnik to identify the FAA representative. … In summary, the court stated: the text of the Warsaw Convention establishes “bodily injury” as a precondition to recovery.

State Ex Rel. Department of Human Services v. E.K.

230 Or. App. 63 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 29, 2009

In 2006, DHS assisted with enrolling the children in public school and provided testing for JC to qualify him for special services. … As previously noted, she also refused to sign the October 2008 “Action Agreement” that established goals and expectations for her.

Willamette Savings & Loan v. Blake & Neal Finance Co.

577 F. Supp. 1415 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 6, 1984

Avoidance of loss on either ground was clearly dependent upon the sound management and continued solvency of West Coast Schools. … Blake & Neal would qualify as an enterprise, as would Glenn individually. The third possibility would be for Blake & Neal and Glenn jointly to be the "enterprise.” 5 .

Portland Audubon Society v. Lujan

795 F. Supp. 1489 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 8, 1992

However, other qualified experts believe that the ISC’s conservation strategy is more that sufficiently protective. … However, other qualified experts believe that Dr.