Case law

Danielson v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 7, 2017

Here, the vehicles for which DCI made purchases at Les Schwab included both “qualified nonpersonal use vehicles” and passenger automobiles. … Plaintiffs did not provide a depreciation schedule or other information sufficient to establish any entitlement to a deduction under IRC section 167.

Danielson v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 7, 2017

Here, the vehicles for which DCI made purchases at Les Schwab included both “qualified nonpersonal use vehicles” and passenger automobiles. … Plaintiffs did not provide a depreciation schedule or other information sufficient to establish any entitlement to a deduction under IRC section 167.

Unigestion Holding, S.A. v. UPM Technology, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 28, 2022

When an expert meets the threshold established by FRE 702, the expert may testify and the fact finder decides how much weight to give that testimony. Primiano, 598 F.3d at 565. … In addition, “[e]ntries in a police report based on an officer’s observation and knowledge may be admitted, but statements attributed to other persons are clearly hearsay, and inadmissible under

Gleason v. Filter Holdings, LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 14, 2024

On March 30, 2023, Gleason responded that she was planning on spending spring break with her family, that she had a medical emergency arise, but that she did not qualify for medical leave. (Id. at 8-9.) … “However, use of a single comparator is not clearly erroneous unless an 18 At oral argument, Gleason clarified that she does not allege a pay equity claim based on her short time in the position of Senior Account Director

Silver Falls Timber Co. v. Eastern & Western Lumber Co.

149 Or. 126 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1934

I am not qualified to say how general that practice was.” C. Gr. … Clearly the timber cannot be worth $4 per thousand feet for one purpose and be virtually worthless for another purpose.

Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 3, 2021

Under CEQ regulations, agencies must prepare an Environmental Assessment (“EA”) for qualifying federal actions and/or the more intensive Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”). … The regulations clearly except from NEPA’s requirements “[j]udicial or administrative civil or criminal enforcement actions.” 40 C.F.R. § 1508.1(q)(1), (1)(iv).

State v. Shaw

338 Or. 586 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2005

purports to limit the trial court’s authority under OEC 403 to exclude relevant, but prejudicial, evidence of a defendant’s other crimes to only those circumstances when exclusion is constitutionally required, OEC 404(4) clearly … qualifies as an evi-dentiary change in the law that favors only the prosecution by making the conviction of a defendant more likely.

Doe v. Trump

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 13, 2020

The Court set a deadline for Defendants to supplement the administrative record and also established a supplemental briefing schedule for this motion. Id. Defendants did not supplement the administrative record. … Similarly, the State Department provided guidance to consular officers that “coverage by a family member’s health plan qualifies as approved health insurance.

Garcia v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 18, 2022

Applicable Law The Ninth Circuit has “established a two-step analysis for determining the extent to which a claimant’s symptom testimony must be credited[.]” … May 10, 2017) (finding the claimant’s reliance on Brown-Hunter “unavailing,” and stating that although “the ALJ’s opinion could have more clearly stated each reason and how it served to discount Plaintiff’s credibility,

Good Clean Love, Inc. v. Audacious Beauty, LLC

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 17, 2024

Notice was clearly received. … Indursky would qualify, based on the representations on Defendant’s website, as reasonably calculated to give Defendant notice of this action.

Adasa Inc. v. Avery Dennison Corporation

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 2, 2023

Rule 702 provides that a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other … challenge because “defendant's response brief is an unauthorized supplemental expert disclosure, filed more than four months past the…deadline for expert report disclosures and less than three weeks before trial, and clearly

McDowell Welding & Pipefitting, Inc. v. United States Gypsum Co.

209 Or. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 6, 2006

Examined in isolation, the text of the statute does not clearly reveal the legislature’s intent. The statute is a mix of “mays” — which are typically permissive — and “shalls”— which are typically mandatory. … The Court qualified that rule somewhat by stating that a court does have limited discretion to deny a jury trial when a party would suffer irreparable harm by the trial of the common factual question to a jury.

United States v. Aquatherm GmbH

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 5, 2022

Sakura Reefer et al. points out, had the Advisory Committee meant to limit the scope of Rule 4(k)(2) to federal question claims, it clearly could have done so. … It does not establish personal jurisdiction if the only claims are those arising under state law or the law of another country. . . .”

Eisele v. Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 29, 2022

These cases establish that an action is willful if it is fully knowing, intentional, and voluntary. … Clearly, a malicious action or one taken in bad faith qualifies.

The Fideliter

8 F. Cas. 1177 · District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 20, 1869

return to Russia within three years; but if they should prefer to remain in the ceded territory, they, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, shall be admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities … But if Lugebil really owned this vessel, it is but reasonable to assume that self interest, at least, would have induced him to come before this court and testify as to the facts and circumstances which would establish such

Western Watersheds Project v. Bernhardt

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 20, 2019

OHA found that the criminal convictions were enough to establish violations of governing regulations. … The CX also concluded that the Permit was “in conformance with the [land use plans], qualifies as a categorical exclusion, and does not require further NEPA analysis.”

Boles

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 4, 2026

Rice’s treatment notes alone fails to establish that he meets either Listing 12.04 or 12.15, and the claimant bears the burden of establishing he meets a listing. See Burch, 400 F.3d at 683. … The ALJ also noted that the opinion did not “clearly separate out [Plaintiff]’s mental health functioning during periods of substance abuse[.]”

Re Determination of Water Rights of Hood River.

114 Or. 112 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1923

define the character or extent of riparian rights, but obviously the protection of the statutes extended to and included all those rights recognized in the decisions of this court as belonging to riparian proprietors. *233 Clearly … That act expressly excluded from such appropriation waters, tbe title and right to tbe use of which was vested in riparian proprietors, but authorized any qualified corporate appropriators desiring to acquire such riparian

Vanderbilt v. Bishop

188 F. 971 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Jul 31, 1911

Respecting the age of the trees, it is clearly proven that they were 16 and 17 years old at the time of the sale. Vanderbilt’s positive representation was that they were 14 years old. … claims that no hard-pan exists, but he qualifies that by adding, “as he understands- hard-pan.”

Latif v. Holder

28 F. Supp. 3d 1134 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 24, 2014

In that Opinion and Order the Court concluded Plaintiffs established the first factor under Mathews v. … Clearly, additional procedural safeguards would provide significant probative value. See Mathews, 424 U.S. at 335 , 96 S.Ct. 893 .