Case law

Ott v. Mortgage Investors Corp. of Ohio, Inc.

65 F. Supp. 3d 1046 · District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 3, 2014

“If the plaintiff fails to satisfy either of these prongs, personal jurisdiction is not established in the forum state. … The individual defendants have not established that Oregon is an unreasonable forum. viii.

State v. Beauvais

357 Or. 524 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 16, 2015

The state asserts that a medical expert is uniquely qualified to discern and explain the sig- nificance of such a connection to a lay trier of fact. … “the preliminary facts are not case-specific”). 13   On review, the state asserts that defendant made a generalized pretrial objection to the KIDS Center report that is unavailing because much of the report was “clearly

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 .

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

United States v. Heine

314 F.R.D. 498 · District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 28, 2016

Moreover, given Agent Woodford’s testimony that he immediately called for backup, the tapes were clearly relevant to the defendant’s location and the official restraint defense. Id. at 1184. … The Ninth Circuit explained: The documents, if they existed, could have been used by Doe to help establish his state of mind.

Flug v. University of Oregon

170 Or. App. 660 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 1, 2000

The medical release that plaintiff eventually delivered to defendant clearly indicated that plaintiffs doctors believed that plaintiff was unable to perform the essential functions of her job in that department. … That focus is too narrow, because a plaintiff can prevail on a retaliation claim by establishing that the defendant retaliated against her for opposing claimed discriminatory practices even if the practices were not, in fact

State Ex Rel. Zidell v. Jones

301 Or. 79 · Oregon Supreme Court · May 20, 1986

However, since the October 13th and December 26th orders had the combined effect of terminating the litigation, we believe our jurisdiction is safely established by the rule enunciated in Jetco Electronics Industries, Inc … Nor did that document qualify as the other type of final judgment contemplated by ORCP 67B., which adjudicates " all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties. " (Emphasis added.)

Williams v. Clemen's Forest Products, Inc.

188 Or. 572 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1950

On petition for rehearing, the court qualified its statement that we have “universally” adhered to the holding in Wolsiffer v. … Clearly there was evidence from which a jury could have found that the work in which the deceased was engaged at the time of the accident was inherently dangerous.

Wolf v. City Railway Co.

50 Or. 64 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 20, 1907

In order clearly to understand this branch of the subject, a statement of the defendant’s theory of the cause and manner of the injury is deemed appropriate. … Co. 167 Pa. 438 ( 31 Atl. 687 ), as establishing the rule governing the case at" bar.

Endicott v. Endicott

206 Or. 587 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1956

The law defining the character of proof which is required in order to support a claim of cruel and inhuman treatment is firmly established in our decisions and is not in controversy here. See Billion v. … But in these respects *600 the hospital records clearly support the plaintiff’s testimony. Defendant was for many years an alcoholic and a drug addict.

O'Neill v. Multnomah County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 13, 2012

In order for this court to find that Defendant abused its discretion, there must be evidence that Defendant “acted capriciously or arrived at a conclusion which was clearly wrong.” Eyler v. … DECISION TC-MD 110957D 3 or tax collector notify a taxpayer that the deadline to qualify for the three percent discount has passed

Dept. of Human Services v. A. B.

Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 8, 2018

With a founded child neglect disposi- tion, she is no longer qualified for that position. 5.    … If the law clearly lim- ited mother’s options for paid or volunteer work, we would be persuaded of the judgment’s continuing practical effects.

Slockish v. US Federal Highway Admin.

664 F. Supp. 2d 1192 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 13, 2009

"In a case such as this, where the violation complained of may have caused continuing harm and where the court can still act to remedy such harm by limiting its future adverse effects, the parties clearly retain a legally … The Second and Third Claims allege that the FHWA and Garrett failed to employ a qualified archaeologist resulting in a failure to identify the cultural and historical resources in the project area.

Woodroffe v. Campa

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 10, 2021

An authorized deprivation is one carried out pursuant to established state procedures, regulations, or statutes.” Barth v. … He does not allege sufficient facts, however, to establish that he has a qualifying disability as defined by the ADA or that O’Toole denied him PAGE 13 – ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Hays v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 9, 2017

Plaintiff’s only other discernable argument is that he is “clearly not the specific ‘person’ who is plainly and clearly made liable by the written statutes of Title 26 United States Code for the payment of the federal personal … Nothing in the documents presented to the court indicates that he qualified for deductions sufficient to reduce his gross income by more than $35,000.

Kerr v. Bauer

278 Or. App. 224 · Yamhill County Circuit Court, Oregon · May 11, 2016

“Accordingly, Deed [#] 3 and subsequent deeds in the chain are valid and establish the current title to the property.” (Emphases in original.) … That general principle may not hold “when something in the text of the opinion itself clearly indicates that the remand is partial,” but there is nothing in the text of Kerr I to clearly indicate a partial remand. Id.

Niemela v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · May 2, 2019

This was clearly not the intent of the 2000 law. … No evidence was presented at trial to establish the metropolitan area where Niemela works and lives.

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Hendrick

346 Or. 98 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 2009

In essence, the accused's defense before the trial panel turned on whether the undisputed facts established that he was or was not engaged in the practice of law. … Paulson establishes that, contrary to the majority's reasoning, not every procedural error that affects the composition of a trial panel requires a new hearing.

State v. Saunders

103 Or. App. 488 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 3, 1990

However, we also agree with the trial court that the state has not established that there were exigent circumstances. … Rather, the "reason to believe" requirement qualifies the last phrase in the statute.

Pitchford Ex Rel. M. v. Salem-Keizer School District No. 24J

155 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 20, 2001

While she did not meet all the goals that had been established for her, she did make some progress. … That is the key requirement under the law, and it was clearly complied with here.