Case law

Chao v. Westside Drywall, Inc.

709 F. Supp. 2d 1037 · District Court, D. Oregon · May 13, 2010

When a statement is hearsay within hearsay, or double hearsay, each statement must qualify under some exemption or exception to the hearsay rule. FRE 805; United States v. … “The Bonnette factors are properly applied where an individual is clearly employed by one of several entities and the only question is which one.” Morgan v. F.T.

Stephens v. Standard Insurance Company

District Court, D. Oregon · May 21, 2021

Here, the “trust” is Standard’s ERISA-qualifying benefits plan, and the “trustee” is Standard’s plan administrator. … pay those benefits if it determines that the claimant qualifies.

WaterWatch of Oregon v. Winchester Water Control District

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 22, 2021

Pointing to various statutes, Defendant “submits that a four-year statute of limitations period should be inferred but, even if a six-year period is utilized, Plaintiffs’ claims are nonetheless clearly time- barred.” … She also found dismissal inappropriate because “it would mean that [the agency] could immunize its allegedly unreasonable delay [in complying with statutory duties] from judicial review simply by extending that delay for

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.”

Oregon AFSCME Council 75 v. OJD - Yamhill County

304 Or. App. 794 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 17, 2020

will be granted or denied; the order in which their employees may use various types of leave; whether their employees may use sick leave to care for certain persons who do not meet the standard definition for qualified … asserts: “At its core, [ERB’s] decision was grounded on a conclusion that the Yamhill County Circuit Court employees have different enough working conditions from all other OJD employees that they form a clearly

Linstrom v. Lincoln County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Nov 16, 2018

It is not buildable and does not qualify for a septic permit. (Ptf’s Ex 8 at 1.) … On the one hand, the subject property deeds clearly state that the property boundary extends only to the high water line.11 That supports Defendant’s view that Plaintiff knew what he bought when he bought it.

Green v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 7, 2024

Kijakazi, 32 F.4th 785, 792 (9th Cir. 2022) (“The revised social security regulations are clearly irreconcilable with our caselaw according special deference to the opinions of treating and examining physicians on account … Stowell, are more qualified than myself to make these determinations.

Oregon Natural Desert Ass'n v. Sabo

854 F. Supp. 2d 889 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 30, 2012

It is true, as plaintiffs assert, that, “[t]he preservation of our environment, as required by NEPA and NFMA, is clearly in the public interest.” Earth Island Inst. v. U.S. … He stated that the project qualified to be excluded from documentation in an EIS or EA, citing a regulation. Parties responded to the scoping letter and to the issue of cattle grazing on Round Meadow.

Lares v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Oct 25, 2024

The Commissioner has established a five-step process for determining whether a person is disabled. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137, 140 (1987); 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520, 416.920. … If anything, Plaintiff qualifying for housing with an organization committed to helping people with psychiatric disabilities is consistent with his mental health allegations.

Colcord v. Premera Blue Cross

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 29, 2019

Ultimately, when the relationship is not clearly centered in one location, this factor bears little weight. See Veridian, 295 F. Supp. 3d at 1154. … Under Alaska law, “[p]arties do not undertake obligations contained in a separate document unless their contract clearly says so. . . .

Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC v. Sevcik

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 6, 2021

Thus, even if Morgan Stanley clearly established that it would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief, it would not be entitled to its requested relief. I. … Davidson postcards arguably qualify an indirect attempt to solicit. They appear to be D.A. Davidson’s “initiation of contact with” at least one “customer” on Sevcik’s behalf.

Gray v. Linn County Assessor

Oregon Tax Court · Jan 9, 2018

For purposes of the state cost factors, Tracy determined the pole barn’s construction quality and design features—such as its concrete slab floor—qualified it as a class 5 general purpose building. … While Defendant did not establish that its trending was correct, the burden of proving a change to the tax roll falls on /// FINAL DECISION TC-MD 170092G

Lewis v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 5, 2020

That qualifies as a marked limitation in physical functioning. … [has] clearly caused her to be unable to sustain full time work since she stopped working in 2015.” AR 14. b.

Joshua v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 8, 2023

Kijakazi, 32 F. 4th 785, 792 (9th Cir. 2022) (“The revised social security regulations are clearly irreconcilable with our caselaw according special deference to the opinions of treating and examining physicians on account … Plaintiff argues that this error was harmful because, contrary to Williamson’s observations, the ALJ found that the record “does not establish any resulting functional limitations that would significantly affect the claimant

Ivie v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 28, 2021

Feb. 21, 2018) (“Ninth Circuit has not decided what qualifies as ‘substantially younger’” and [] “courts routinely require an age difference of at least six years.”) (citations omitted). … established until spring 2019.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Jensen

District Court, D. Oregon · May 23, 2022

The moving party has the burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). … “The reasons for limiting recovery to the amount actually expended for repair or replacement seem reasonable, and such a limitation should be enforced if it is clearly stated in the insurance contract.”

State v. Smith

301 Or. 681 · Oregon Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1986

Where the Miranda -type warnings were not given, the burden fully remains on the state to establish that the confession was voluntary. … The policy of the statutes clearly is independent of the common-law rule excluding "involuntary" confessions.

Rogers v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Sep 20, 2016

Looking at the guidelines in the federal regulations for the nine factors set out above, Plaintiffs clearly meet the second and third factors, do not appear to satisfy the first, sixth, or seventh, and may or may not satisfy … That said, the court need not determine whether Plaintiffs qualify under IRC section 183 because they have failed to provide any evidence, documentary or testimonial, pertaining to the claimed expenses.

Smith v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 10, 2021

Dobles’s opinion, however, clearly states that she reviewed Dr. … App’x 446, 450 (9th Cir. 2020) (remanding for an award of benefits where, as here, an improperly discredited opinion and VE testimony established disability); Varela v. Saul, 827 F.

Meyer v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 15, 2019

Phelps “confirmed” that Plaintiff’s parents “observ[ed]” the same cycling of mood and energy, which are “quite substantial and clearly interfere[] with [Plaintiff’s] ability to progress functionally.” … and testimony that she rejected for legally insufficient reasons, our precedent and the objectives of the credit-as-true rule foreclose the argument that a remand for the purpose of allowing the ALJ to have a mulligan qualifies