Case law

State v. Wolfgang

278 Or. App. 781 · Yamhill County Circuit Court, Oregon · Jun 15, 2016

Defendant at no time argued that he had been offered or promised leniency, immunity, or any other inducement. … Defendant’s reference to “criminal episode” comes from a different statute, ORS 131.505(4), which defines “criminal episode” for purposes of double jeopardy as “continuous and uninterrupted conduct that establishes at least

Green Cross Dispensary, LLC v. City of Brownsville

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 22, 2023

To defeat qualified immunity, “[t]he plaintiff bears the burden of proof that the right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.” Romero v. … Despite this broad pronouncement, Elliot-Park does not clearly establish law that could defeat qualified immunity in this case. “[C]learly established law must be ‘particularized’ to the facts of the case.”

Due-Donohue v. Beal

191 Or. App. 98 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 26, 2003

Thus, the language in those statutes clearly distinguishes between a “party in person” and an attorney. … instructing us that we may not “insert what has been omitted,” ORS 174.010, is frequently misapplied — after all, any explanation or paraphrase of a statute adds words to it — in cases like this where the drafters have clearly

Day v. City of Canby

143 Or. App. 341 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 4, 1996

The burden of establishing immunity is on the public body claiming it. Stevenson v. State of Oregon, 290 Or 3, 15 , 619 P2d 247 (1980). … Plaintiff argues that Mosley is “clearly distinguishable.”

Hernandez v. Kidwell

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 9, 2022

that they are otherwise entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Olson v. River View Cemetery Ass'n

220 Or. 220 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1960

The basis for the demurrer was that the complaint then alleged sufficient facts to bring the defendant within the charitable immunity from tort liability. … statutes was to immunize the defendant from tort liability.

Perez v. Capps

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 19, 2024

Qualified Immunity Finally, defendants argue that Conway and Sigrah are entitled to qualified immunity.4 Qualified immunity shields an official sued in their personal … The qualified immunity analysis can be distilled into two elements: (1) whether the alleged conduct would violate a constitutional or statutory right; (2) whether the law clearly established, at the time of the conduct

Weaver v. Lane County

10 Or. App. 281 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 10, 1972

We agree that evidence clearly established that defendant Attig was engaged in the performance of discretionary functions here, and that he was immune from suit. … This cause of action is based on negligence and is an exception to the common-law immunity of a governmental body. Ogle v.

Tomasek v. Oregon State Highway Commission

196 Or. 120 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1952

Melver are, and with their predecessors in office, were the duly acting and qualified Highway Commission of the State of Oregon, and as such have and have had control over all matters pertaining to the selection, establishment … The contention that the city was immune to tort liability was sustained. This court has consistently held to that principle in the absence of waiver of immunity by statutory or charter provision.

Baillie v. State Board of Higher Education

79 Or. App. 705 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 4, 1986

Reversed and remanded for determination of whether petitioner meets the requirements of residence expressed in OAR 580-10-030(1). 1 In deciding who qualifies for resident tuition, the Board applies the following rules promulgated … OAR 580-10-025(4) provides, in pertinent part: “An emancipated student who establishes an Oregon residence as determined by rule 580-10-030 shall pay a nonresident fee unless: “(a) The student establishes Oregon residence

Cascadia Wildlands v. Kitzhaber

911 F. Supp. 2d 1075 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 19, 2012

It is well established that legislators are absolutely immune from civil suit for actions taken in their official lawmaking capacity. Bogan v. … The Ninth Circuit has formulated a four-step test to determine whether an act is legislative for the purposes of establishing absolute immunity.

Mendenhall v. Griner

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 2, 2024

Qualified Immunity In evaluating whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, a court considers whether (1) the state actor’s conduct violated a constitutional … The Ninth Circuit has held that this right is clearly established for qualified immunity purposes. Castro, 833 F.3d at 1066–67; see also Harpole v. Bos., No. 2:22-CV-01033-HZ, 2023 WL 5806250, at *8 (D. Or.

Mannex Corp. v. Bruns

250 Or. App. 50 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 16, 2012

To prevail, plaintiff must establish that the evidence in the summary judgment record would allow a reasonable *58 factfinder to find: (1) the making of a defamatory statement; (2) the “publication” of the defamatory material … A statement that is otherwise defamatory is privileged if it is uttered under such circumstances that the law grants immunity to the speaker. Wattenburg v. United Medical Lab., 269 Or 377, 379 , 525 P2d 113 (1974).

State v. Bergin

231 Or. App. 36 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 23, 2009

similar arguments from the state and the dissent, points out that the forensic evidence is “testimony against” the defendant, and that “there is not a third category of witnesses, helpful to the prosecution, but somehow immune … sample, or accuracy of the testing device, must appear in person as part of the prosecution’s case. * * * [Documents prepared in the regular course of equipment maintenance may well qualify as nontestimonial records.”

THUNDERBIRD HOTELS, LLC v. City of Portland

670 F. Supp. 2d 1164 · District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 5, 2009

Thunderbird contends that the hotel site “would not qualify for any exemption” either under the moratorium as originally enacted, or as later amended. … White, 484 U.S. 219, 224 , 108 S.Ct. 538 , 98 L.Ed.2d 555 (1988), and individuals seeking to establish such immunity bear the burden of establishing that it applies. Trevino v. Gates, 23 F.3d 1480 , 1482 (9th Cir.1994).

Castle Sawmills, Inc. v. State Tax Commission

1 Or. Tax 571 · Oregon Tax Court · May 4, 1964

Defendant established a method of apportionment by rules and regulations implementing ORS 317.180. STC Reg 7.180. … Its income is not immunized from Oregon excise taxation by Spector. Its intangible income is subject to excise taxation at plaintiff’s domicile in Oregon.

Olson v. Grant County

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 22, 2023

Analysis This Court finds that Defendant Carpenter is entitled to qualified immunity because his actions did not violate “clearly established law” such that “every ‘ … Where a defendant properly raises the defense of qualified immunity, “[i]t is the plaintiff who bears the burden of showing the rights allegedly violated [are] clearly established.”

Rosa v. City of Newberg

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 30, 2020

not clearly established at the time of the incident. … The second step is to determine “whether the right was clearly established.” Id.

Erwin v. Oregon Ex Rel. Kitzhaber

231 F. Supp. 2d 1003 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 23, 2001

Erwin cites to O.R.S. 9.080 and O.R.S. 9.200 authorizing the Board of Governors to establish the Lawyers’ Liability Fund. … The record in this case establishes clearly that Erwin had the opportunity to litigate and in fact did litigate in the state court action the same claims and issues raised in this federal court action against the same parties

Lyons v. Peters

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 22, 2019

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that there is no genuine dispute of fact as to whether the non- supervisory defendants violated Plaintiffs’ clearly established right … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. G.