Case law

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Paulson

346 Or. 676 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 3, 2009

DR 2-106(A) DR 2-106(A) prohibits a lawyer from charging an illegal or clearly excessive fee. … Instead, he disputes only whether his conduct qualified as the practice of law.

Clark v. GSL Properties, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 26, 2024

preliminary screening of an in forma pauperis complaint and dismiss any claims that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, are frivolous or malicious, or seek monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … “A plaintiff can establish a FHA discrimination claim under a theory of disparate treatment or disparate impact.” Id. (citing Gamble, 104 F.3d at 304-05).

State v. Ayers

203 Or. App. 683 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 18, 2006

However, in Vawter , the statutory speedy trial issue was more clearly presented and addressed. … unrepresented but knowingly fails to demand trial pursuant to Article 111(a) of the IAD on pending Oregon charges, that inmate will be deemed to have “waived” the protections of ORS 135.747. 11 *701 Two critical caveats qualify

NRC Environmental Services Inc. v. Barnards Holdings, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 12, 2022

Oil qualifies and is regulated as a “solid waste.” 5. … NRC has not established that any additional damages were caused by WTS’ breach. 4.

Tapia-Martinez v. Taylor

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 9, 2020

clearly established precedent if the state court applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set forth in [the Supreme Court's] cases" or "if the state court confronts a set of facts that … Given this history, Petitioner cannot establish that Oregon’s state courts unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court law when they issued rulings consistent with Apodaca

In re Spencer

355 Or. 679 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 26, 2014

We review the record de novo to deter- mine whether the Bar established the alleged violations by clear and convincing evidence. … Given the complaint’s limited focus, we conclude that the Bar has not established that the accused violated RPC 1.7(a).

Godfrey

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 12, 2026

established by medical evidence.’” … (See Pl.’s Br. at 17, suggesting Plaintiff qualifies for an equivalency listing for an endocrine disorder; see id. at 18, suggesting Plaintiff qualifies for an equivalency listing for a mental disorder).

Marvin Jennings v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 30, 2026

The Court first evaluates whether the language in the instant contract clearly and unmistakably delegates issues of waiver by litigation conduct to the arbitrator. … authentication from a qualified records custodian of that entity.” Pl.’s Resp. 13.

Waldo

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 19, 2026

Required Parties “Rule 19(a)(1) defines ‘required party,’ and establishes two broad categories of required parties.” Ward v. … Instead, whether ATTM is a required party depends on whether ATTM’s interests qualify for protection under Rule 19(a)(1)(B)(i).” Id. at 1050.

Papadopoulos v. Oregon State Board of Higher Education

14 Or. App. 130 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 27, 1973

The one exception was somewhat lukewarm, but was clearly not based upon knowledge of the man’s published papers, but instead upon general impressions. … However, we note that at least three of these five years were before petitioner came to Oregon State, and that at the administrative hearing the Board stipulated that petitioner was well qualified when hired. ⑤ “(1) The State

Blumenkron v. Multnomah County

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 25, 2021

To violate substantive due process, particularly for land use regulation, government action must be clearly arbitrary and irrational. Kawaoka, 17 F.3d at 1234. … Sovereign Immunity for State Defendants State Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’ claims against them must be dismissed because they are immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment.

J.B. v. Gray

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 29, 2024

Kaplan, the Ninth Circuit determined that the plaintiff had no clearly established right under the Eighth Amendment to be provided with a mattress. No. 93-17123, 1995 WL 398878, at *2 (9th Cir. July 7, 1995). … In finding that such a right was not clearly established, the court looked to cases from other circuits and determined that those cases focused primarily on the conditions that accompanied the mattress deprivation to determine

Dasmesh Darbar Sikh Temple v. Marion County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Jul 9, 2012

President testified that the Temple was established in Salem, Oregon, at its current site in October 2005. He testified that a change in the law no longer permits the priests to live in the Temple basement. … (Washington County), 18 OTR 409, 422 (2006) clearly stated that: “With regard to residences, it is neither the vows of poverty and obedience nor the promise of free housing, nor even substantial religious

Service v. Sumpter Valley Ry. Co.

88 Or. 554 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1918

It was clearly interstate in its nature. ’ ’ In 1911 was decided Southern Pac. Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce Comm., 219 U. S. 498 ( 55 L. Ed. 310 , 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 279). … To be a good eomplaint, immune from the effects of a general demurrer, the plaintiff must show in himself legal connection with the matter involved in litigation and a right in himself to recover the amount demanded. *588

Smith v. Healy

744 F. Supp. 2d 1112 · District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 7, 2010

Despite the fact that state law protection was available for ideas which clearly fell within the subject matter of patent, the Court concluded that the nature and degree of state protection did not conflict with the federal … The door light design is a trade secret that qualifies as information that derives economic value from not being generally known to the public, because it is a design that has significant consumer market potential and Plaintiffs

Ritter v. BEALS

225 Or. 504 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1961

The place where Larsen was put to work had been created by defendant before it *532 employed him, and that it was a dangerous place the casualty establishes. … That the majority know this to be the rule is clearly pointed out in the case of Shields v. W.R. Grace & Co., 91 Or 187, 201 , 179 P 265 , from which they quote: "6.

Krone v. Legacy Health

District Court, D. Oregon · May 6, 2025

After the COVID-19 pandemic began, French established and oversaw COVID-19 transmission mitigation policies in four California emergency departments. … article concludes that, because respiratory viruses like SARS-CoV-2 (and the common flu) rapidly evolve, current vaccines “elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers v. O'Keeffe

134 F. Supp. 3d 1270 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 23, 2015

The party seeking to invoke the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court bears the burden of establishing that such jurisdiction exists. Stock W., Inc. v. … Judgment on the pleadings is proper where “the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

Layne v. Portland Traction Co.

212 Or. 658 · Oregon Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1957

The testimony of the engineer then establishes that he observed the Johnston vehicle when it stopped (Tr. 421). … The plaintiff qualified his answer, as our quotation from his testimony indicates, by saying: "If that train was properly lighted."

In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Phillips

338 Or. 125 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 3, 2005

The Accused misled [his] clients by having trust reviewers present [law firm] business cards without clearly disclosing that the reviewers were also insurance salespersons and agents of [FSN]. “2. … The ABA Standards establish, as a preliminary matter, that suspension is the appropriate sanction for each of the three violations.