Case law

Lott v. Vial Fotheringham LLP

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 30, 2021

Time spent by counsel in establishing the right to a fee award is compensable. Davis v. … The Court found 9 instances where the requested hours clearly overlapped between attorneys or covered the same subject matter. The Court eliminated 6.4 hours on this basis.

State of Oregon, Department of Human Services v. Hutchins

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Mar 23, 2021

It is well established that bankruptcy courts do not possess a roving commission to do equity. … Having found that the evidence establishes an intentional omission, I turn next to Ms.

Hertel v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 5, 2023

Jappay’s recommendations qualify as a medical opinion under the regulations, the ALJ did not err because Dr. … Plaintiff’s argument that the specified abilities do not qualify as skills lacks merit. See Renner v.

Owens v. State Farm Fire And Casualty Company

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 14, 2023

The evidence submitted by the defendant established that his attorneys had reasonable hourly rates for Oregon.”). … In response, Bruno Jagelski, a first-party insurance lawyer in Eastern Oregon, declares there are six firms in Eastern Oregon that were qualified to represent the Owens in this case. Jagelski Decl. ¶ 1.

Walker v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 16, 2020

The burden of proof to establish a disability rests upon the claimant. Gomez v. … The record clearly supports ALJ Jones’s conclusions with regard to conservative treatment. B.

Nisley v. Rosenblum

District Court, D. Oregon · May 23, 2022

appoint some suitable person to fill the vacancy until the next election and qualification of a successor at the next general election,” and that the person the Governor “appoint[s] to fill [the] vacancy in the office must qualify … Paul, 912 F.2d 215, 220 (8th Cir. 1990) (“[T]he advice was a misstatement of law, [which] constitutes nothing more than a misjudgment of law, and clearly cannot be deemed arbitrary, capricious or so unreasonable to be egregious

Wahab v. Wahab

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 8, 2023

Supp. 3d at 909-10 (holding that online statements qualified for protection under Oregon’s anti-SLAPP statute and noting that “accusations of abuse on their own can serve the interest of the public at large” and the sexual … The Ninth Circuit has clearly held that where, as here, a defendant’s anti-SLAPP motion presents purely legal questions and the Rule 12(b)(6) standard applies, a plaintiff is not required to present evidence in defending

Stirling v. Salazar

District Court, D. Oregon · Nov 15, 2022

Apr. 25, 2022) (holding that a claim “based on the BOP’s asserted failure to provide adequate social distancing measures, adequate testing, its adherence to a herd immunity policy, and its failure to adhere to mask and … Finally, the evolution of compassionate release during the COVID-19 pandemic has clearly demonstrated that habeas relief is not the only option available to Petitioners to remedy the alleged deprivations they assert here

Board of Trustees of the Western States Office and Professional Employees Pension Fund v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 483

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 11, 2020

The Fund is a multiemployer pension fund maintained and administered to provide retirement benefits to qualified labor employees. ECF 1 at ¶ 4. It is established and maintained pursuant to ERISA. Id. … First, unlike a surcharge, a rehabilitation contribution rate is clearly a “rate” capable of inclusion within the withdrawal liability calculation.

Gilman v. Intel Corporation

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 27, 2020

App. 4th 292, 329 (2006) (“The analysis that followed [in Robinson] suggested that fraud itself is immune from application of the economic loss rule because fraud is particularly blameworthy and therefore unlike both contract … Material omissions may qualify as intentional conduct and support a fraud claim that is separate from a contractual duty and involves different or additional harm. See, e.g., Dairy v.

Cunningham v. Thompson

186 Or. App. 221 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 5, 2003

argues that he was prejudiced by that failure because *252 Cochran was an “important” witness whose testimony in the penalty phase regarding petitioner’s future dangerousness “undoubtedly influenced” the jury and therefore clearly … According to the state, nothing about the status of Cochran’s license at the relevant time suggested that he was not a qualified expert, and his “self-described efforts to keep dangerous criminals locked up would almost certainly

Fields v. Squires

9 F. Cas. 29 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Oregon · Feb 15, 1868

Arden) said, he was clearly of the opinion that this covenant was a contract for a valuable consideration, affecting the land and would affect the heir. … by the terms of the .grant,it was made liable to be determined by the happening of a particular event — namely: her own death before the issuance of the patent The estate granted her was therefore, what the law calls a qualified

State of Oregon v. Trump

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 7, 2019

The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing both requirements. Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561. II. … See, e.g., id. §§ 10171- 10191 (establishing “discretionary grant[]” programs for the Bureau of Justice Assistance); id. §§ 10381-10389 (establishing a competitive grant program for community policing funds).

SAIF Corp. v. Wart

192 Or. App. 505 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 24, 2004

As discussed above, the noncooperation denial at issue in this case clearly was not issued on the ground that the injury was not compensable but on the ground that the injury or condition "otherwise does not give rise to … NOTES [1] Former ORS 656.262(15) provides, in part: "If the director finds that a worker fails to reasonably cooperate with an investigation involving an initial claim to establish a compensable injury * * *, the director

Lynch v. Multnomah County

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 27, 2024

There are no “factual questions not clearly resolved in the pleadings” and the factual and legal issues are “sufficiently clear.” Id. … Defendants argue that the Oregon Tort Claims Act (“OTCA”) applies to Plaintiffs’ state- law takings claims, and that dismissal is required under the OTCA for three reasons: (1) Defendants are entitled to apparent authority immunity

Gabbert v. Josephine County

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 27, 2024

There are no “factual questions not clearly resolved in the pleadings” and the factual and legal issues are “sufficiently clear.” Id. … Defendants argue that the Oregon Tort Claims Act (“OTCA”) applies to Plaintiffs’ state- law takings claims, and that dismissal is required under the OTCA for three reasons: (1) Defendants are entitled to apparent authority immunity

Canning v. Washington County

District Court, D. Oregon · Apr 4, 2025

There are mitigating factors because you intended to bring the bowl back and we've established that, so, well well [sic] aware of that. … Defendant does not provide any evidence to clearly demonstrate that plaintiff did not work these asserted hours.

Cortes-Diaz v. DL Reforestation, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 21, 2022

This form of travel is clearly ordinary home-to-work travel or commute and therefore is not compensable under Oregon wage and hour law, nor is it compensable under the PTPA. … Here, a causal connection is established indirectly by temporal proximity.

Truett v. Dept. of Rev.

Oregon Tax Court · Mar 13, 2018

MPI’s 2012 and 2013 Gross Receipts A taxpayer in Oregon must keep “such permanent books of account or records * * * as are sufficient to establish the amount of gross income, deductions, credits, or other matters … Still, MPI was paying an expense it was obligated by its lease to pay, and that expense qualifies for a deduction under IRC section 162(a)(3).

Oregon Natural Desert Ass'n v. Bureau of Land Management

District Court, D. Oregon · Dec 7, 2022

In this map, BLM has clearly charted the distinction between areas available and unavailable for livestock grazing. Id. … Although further NEPA analysis may occur before constructing fences that do not qualify for a categorical exclusion, 40 C.F.R. § 1501.4, no additional NEPA assessment is required to make portions of the 13 remaining key