Case law

Rayborn v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 22, 2023

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. … Then, at step five, the ALJ relied on testimony from a qualified vocational expert to find that plaintiff could perform a significant number of jobs in the national economy. Tr. 29-30.

Murphy v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 15, 2025

The initial burden of proof rests upon the claimant to establish disability. Howard v. Heckler, 782 F.2d 1484, 1486 (9th Cir. 1986). … Likewise, the written notes and observations from Plaintiff’s sessions with Stoner also fail to establish the proffered limitations.

Strasser v. State of Oregon

368 Or. 238 · Oregon Supreme Court · Jun 24, 2021

Finally, the state rejects petitioner’s assertion that, in these circum- stances, he need not establish prejudice from counsel’s inef- fective performance at all. … In their com- mentary on section 15 of the Act (Or Laws 1959, ch 636, § 15), now codified at ORS 138.550, Collins and Neil clearly distinguish the preclusion rules that apply under subsec- tions (1) and (2): “Under

Erickson v. Courtney

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 7, 2020

Specifically, counsel argued that the Utah school counselor qualified as an “other governmental agency.” The trial court rejected this argument. … A state court unreasonably applies clearly established federal law under § 2254(d)(1), if its decision is so lacking in justification that there is an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility

Parchen v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 20, 2019

In step five, the Commissioner must establish that the claimant can perform other work. Yuckert, 482 U.S. at141–42; 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(e) & (f), 416.920(e) & (f). … Alvord examined Plaintiff in 2012, she presented as “quite disheveled, malodorous with poor dentition” and he noted that “hygiene was clearly lacking.” Tr. 846.

Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 14, 2021

The trader agrees to an arrangement with a qualified broker (or the clearinghouse) to provide him with a margin deposit as required, and also agrees to reimburse him or accept credit for all interim gains … or losses in value of that futures contract resulting from day-to- day changes in its price on the floor of the established commodity exchange.

Trout Unlimited v. Lohn

645 F. Supp. 2d 929 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 13, 2007

Thus, a species is threatened if it is likely to qualify for endangered status within the foreseeable future. The ESA charged the Secretary of Commerce (“Secretary”) with listing marine and anadromous species. … The NWFSC review posits that the empirical record is too short and the cause- and-effect relationship behind recent escapements is too poorly established to support Oregon’s hypothesis.

Sommer v. Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 9, 2024

Thus, Regence argues that Sommer falls short of establishing that exhaustion was “demonstrably doomed to fail.” (Id. at 8.) … Third, Sommer argues that by denying his coverage claim, Sommer lost the “reasonable opportunity to challenge in ‘real time’ . . . the availability of qualified in-network providers . . . to perform the [surgery.]”

Dunkel v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jan 10, 2022

It is important that these findings be made at all levels of adjudication to clearly establish the basis for the determination or decision for the claimant and for a reviewing body including a Federal district court. … As SSR-82-14 explains, written findings are crucial to “clearly establish the basis for the determination or decision for the claimant and for a reviewing body including a Federal district court.”). SSR 82-14.

In re Galena Biopharma, Inc. Securities Litigation

117 F. Supp. 3d 1145 · District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 5, 2015

DreamTeam and Lidingo did so, often using third parties and aliases that falsely claimed to be established, credible investment professionals. … Novel or atypical methods should not provide immunity from the securities laws.’ ” (emphasis in original) (quoting A.T. Brod & Co. v.

ABC Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 22, 2020

For example, Plaintiff observes that the corporations composing its Parks and Resorts segment are clearly not broadcasters. … Plaintiff clearly engages in interstate broadcasting.

Jett v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 7, 2023

Because the ALJ found no impairment qualifying Plaintiff as disabled, the ALJ assessed Plaintiff’s RFC before moving to step four of the sequential analysis. AR 30-37. … The standard for nonmedical opinion testimony has previously been established by the courts and did not need to be explained in a regulation changing how medical testimony was to be evaluated.

Campbell-Turner v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 16, 2020

Plaintiff’s fibromyalgia symptoms include daily pain, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating and thinking clearly, which she called “fibro fog” or “brain fog.” Tr. 38, 267. … out certain minimal activities does not detract from credibility as to overall disability or meet threshold for transferable work skills); Molina, 674 F.3d at 1112– 13 (the claimant need not vegetate in a dark room to qualify

State ex rel. Department of Human Services v. Williams

194 Or. App. 57 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 2004

According to the state, the evidence clearly demonstrates that mother is unable to parent both of her children simultaneously. … Significantly, none of mother’s witnesses was treating mother for her mental health problems, nor was any of them qualified to do so.

Davis v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Apr 8, 2020

That increase in value—presumably at least partly due to Plaintiffs’ work irrigating, establishing new pastures, and otherwise operating the ranch—counterbalanced an increasing proportion of Plaintiffs’ yearly operating … It is immaterial whether Plaintiffs’ hope for profit was reasonable; their intent qualifies their ranching expenses as business expenses. See Treas Reg § 1.183–2(a). III.

Kiss v. Best Buy Stores

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 6, 2022

Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40, 52 (1999); see also Sutton, 192 F.3d at 838-39 (“To accept Plaintiff’s argument [that a private business qualifies as a state actor] would be to convert every [business] . . . into a governmental … Fla. 2021) (dismissing Section 1983 claim challenging mask mandate under the Emergency Use Authorization Act because “the FDCA clearly states that its requirements may only be enforced by the United States government[

Adasa Inc. v. Avery Dennison Corporation

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 15, 2021

The established profitability of the product made under the patent; its commercial success; and its current popularity. 9. … The opinion testimony of qualified experts. 15.

Great American Alliance Insurance Company v. SIR - Columbia Knoll Associates, Limited Partnership

District Court, D. Oregon · Sep 4, 2020

The rules of evidence do not apply to “any preliminary question about whether a witness is qualified.” Fed. R. Evid. 104. … Clearly one cannot occupy a building if it has completely fallen down or caved in. However, the same may be true for a building which has partially fallen down or caved in.

STATE EX REL. DHS v. Williams

94 P.3d 131 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 2004

According to the state, the evidence clearly demonstrates that mother is unable to parent both of her children simultaneously. … Significantly, none of mother's witnesses was treating mother for her mental health problems, nor was any of them qualified to do so.

Comcast Corp. II v. Dept. of Rev. (TC 5265)

24 Or. Tax 250 · Oregon Tax Court · Nov 25, 2020

The Court’s only post-Allied-Signal opinion to discuss the concept of “operational function” apportion- able income does not break new ground in the substantive issue here, but it clearly delineates the concepts that may … The department seems to argue that its adjustments to taxpayer’s carryforward deductions are immune from challenge by taxpayer because the department was at a procedural disadvantage until taxpayer sought to carry forward