Case law

Cox v. Association of Oregon Corrections Employees, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 28, 2024

Courts in the Ninth Circuit use a two-prong inquiry to determine whether a private actor, such as a union, engaged in state action to qualify as a state actor under § 1983. … State Defendants move to dismiss on the grounds that Plaintiff’s claim is barred by sovereign immunity. State MTD at 13.

State v. Meade

327 Or. 335 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1998

clarification of a suspect's statements at length or to restate Miranda warnings and the consequences, some of which are negative, of an invocation of constitutional rights. [5] If the suspect, in responding, conditions or qualifies … As Edwards confirms, a waiver of rights cannot be established in this context "by showing only that [the suspect] responded to further police-initiated custodial interrogation even if he has been advised of his rights." 451

Cret v. Employment Department

146 Or. App. 139 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 29, 1997

In particular, the Board concluded: “Claimants carry the burden of proof to establish that they re-qualify for benefits pursuant to the provisions of ORS 657.200(3)(b) and (c). … Claimants must establish a prima facie case that they did not participate in, finance or have a direct interest in the outcome of the strike.

Security Bank v. Chiapuzio

304 Or. 438 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1987

ORS 93.710(1) provides for recordation of the interests created by a land sale contract and, now more clearly, for recordation of a security interest in the land subject to a land sale contract. 5 There is not, however, a … The Bank’s recordation of its interest was adequate to give constructive notice to Chiapuzio; therefore, Chiapuzio cannot qualify for priority under ORS 79.3010.

State v. Quinn

290 Or. 383 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1981

Instead, the drafters of this measure prepared a measure which, in my opinion, clearly fails to satisfy requirements of the Constitution of the United States as stated by the Supreme Court of the United States. … In response to that problem, the Court of Appeals was established on July 1, 1969.

Weiss and Hamilton v. Gumbert

191 Or. 119 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 14, 1951

Mead also wrote defendant, withdrawing the original offer of March 28 for the reasons: "(a) false representations were made with respect to the net profits of the business, and (b) the offer has not been accepted by anyone qualified … and discovered that in the original draft of the act as filed in the office of the Secretary of State there was a comma (,) instead of a semicolon (;) after the words "on all moneys after the same becomes due," thereby clearly

Walwyn v. Lane County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 27, 2014

Even accepting Defendant’s contention that its records did not include a sketch or description of the garage, that is not sufficient to establish that the garage was omitted. See, e.g., Fox v. … In Miller, the barn at issue “was assessed at one time in the 1980s” and, for reasons that were not clearly explained, “the barn was not on the assessment roll or assessed for the tax years 1995-96 through 1999-2000.”

Ratto v. Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services

839 F. Supp. 1415 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 13, 1993

Stites advised SSA that plaintiff was severely incapacitated, incapable of performing even the full range of sedentary work, and “certainly” qualifies for disability benefits at this time. Id. … In step five, the Secretary must establish that the claimant can perform other work. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at 141-42 , 107 S.Ct. at 2291-92 ; see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520 (e) & (f), 416.920(e) & (f).

Goren

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 4, 2025

Even if an expert is generally qualified under Kumho Tire Co. v. … [NVP] was clearly a Professional Service Provider.

Oregon & Cal. R. R. v. Jackson County

38 Or. 589 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1901

*601 ruling that fraudulent taxation should be restrained wherever the case is. such that the motive can be legally inquired into — as it always may be in the case of the subordinate agencies — is, in our opinion, very clearly … In order to become qualified for entering upon the discharge of his duties as clerk, he resigned as assessor shortly before taking the oath of office.

State Ex Rel. Western Seed Production Corp. v. Campbell

250 Or. 262 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1968

The court stated: "[Due process limitations] * * * are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation. … The majority opinion makes it appear that the only question is one of establishing the limits on who may be sued and concludes that the remote seller cannot be.

Ferrington v. Department of Revenue

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 28, 2014

Plaintiff has not sought to establish, nor has she established, a home office or principal place of business under IRC § 280A(c)(1). … Although most of Plaintiff’s meal receipts clearly show the date, time, place, and amount of the charge, a large number of the meal receipts either omit any stated qualifying business purpose or bear unexplained hand-written

Gorman v. Douglas County Sheriff

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 31, 2023

Grant, 796 F.2d 288, 290 (9th Cir. 1986) (holding that “a police office has immunity if he arrests with probable cause.”); Cabrera v. … Because Plaintiff’s constitutional rights were not violated, the Court need not reach Defendants’ arguments concerning qualified immunity.

Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co. of Texas v. Wildish Construction Co.

306 Or. 102 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1988

The Barneses in their petition for review recognize that it is “well established” in Oregon that permanent injury and temporary injury to real property warrant different measures of damage. See ante at 112. Hanns v. … Peavey, supra, this court said that the injury need not last forever to qualify as permanent damage. 279 Or at 10 .

Bradfute v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Feb 27, 2020

Plaintiff worked in the Portland area 100 percent of the time for DECISION TC-MD 180370G 4 of 10 seven years before the year at issue; clearly, … Work that is indefinite or indeterminate does not qualify for the exception to the general rule against deducting commuting expenses. Peurifoy v.

Tomlinson

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 6, 2026

Under that framework, Plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by demonstrating (1) that she is a member of a protected class; (2) that she was qualified for her position; (3) that she experienced … Thus, in evaluating whether Plaintiff has established a prima facie case of racial discrimination, the Court focuses on whether Plaintiff was qualified for her position and whether Defendant treated similarly situated

Adidas-America, Inc. v. Payless Shoesource, Inc.

546 F. Supp. 2d 1029 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 22, 2008

distinctive marks may qualify for protection; (3) a reconfiguration of the factors used to determine whether a mark is famous for dilution purposes, including a rejection of dilution claims based on "niche” fame; and (4) … DIRECTV, Inc., 437 F.3d 923, 936-38 (9th Cir.2006) (extending Noen-Pennington immunity to litigation-related activities prior to formal commencement of litigation). 19 .

Eldred v. Burns

182 Or. 394 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1947

This proposition is well established by the authorities, and we so hold. … He was clearly a trespasser attempting to cross the Kingsley property.

Wyatt B. v. Kotek

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 27, 2021

The weight of authority clearly demonstrates that the rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment, though significant, are strictly limited in scope. … Accordingly, the Court concludes that the “case review system” requirement established by §§ 671(a)(16) and 675(5)(A) are subject to enforcement under § 1983.

Yeatts v. Polygon Northwest Co.

Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 4, 2016

Moreover, Trytko verified that Wood Mechanix’s employees were trained and instructed in fall protection protocols and that Wood Mechanix would have a “competent and qualified person” inspect the fall-protection equipment … However, the court also cited the Restatement (Second) of Torts section 409 (1965), for the proposition that there are a variety of exceptions to that rule of immunity. Macomber, 249 Or at 65 n 3.