Case law

Albright v. Employment Appeals Board

32 Or. App. 379 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 7, 1978

Plaintiff argues that under the "futility exception” discussed in Gilstrap v. Mitchell Bros. … We have noted before, see Tierney v.

Thomsen v. Board of Parole

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 10, 2024

Further, the board argues that this case is like Lewis-Taylor v. … Co. v.

Thomsen v. Board of Parole

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 10, 2024

Further, the board argues that this case is like Lewis-Taylor v. … Co. v.

Plane v. Board of Parole

114 Or. App. 60 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 1992

We rejected that argument in Owens v. Board of Parole, 113 Or App 507 , 834 P2d 547 (1992). Petitioner exhausted his administrative remedies. We have jursidiction. … Petitioner contends that the Board erred in finding aggravation under factor O — consecutive sentences.

Thompson v. Board of Parole

114 Or. App. 222 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 8, 1992

PER CURIAM In Thompson v. Board of Parole, 111 Or App 444 , 823 P2d 1051 (1992), we dismissed the petition for judicial review, relying on Denham v. … Board of Parole, 106 Or App 234 , 806 P2d 1167 (1991), because defendant sought review of the order setting his parole release date, instead of the order on administrative review. Under Owens v.

Miller v. Board of Parole

111 Or. App. 662 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 26, 1992

Brown v. State Accident Insurance Fund Corp.

51 Or. App. 389 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 30, 1981

The statutory de novo review power of the Board is expressly limited to the record made at the hearing and transmitted by the referee. Inkley v. Forest Fiber Products Co., 288 Or 337, 345 , 605 P2d 1175 (1980); Coday v. … SAIF, 49 Or App 1015, 1018 , 621 P2d 646 (1980); Holmes v. SAIF, 38 Or App 145 , 589 P2d 1151 (1979); Mansfield v. Caplener Bros. 3 Or App 448 , 474 P2d 785 (1970); McManus v. State Acc. Ins. Fund, supra.

Allen v. Board of Parole

311 Or. App. 38 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 28, 2021

BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, Respondent. … Mastriano v. Board of Parole, 342 Or 684, 690, 159 P3d 1151 (2007).

Biggerstaff v. Board of County Commissioners

240 Or. App. 46 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 29, 2010

More recently, in Kleikamp v. Board of County Commissioners, 240 Or App 57, 65-66 , 246 P3d 56 (2010), we reiterated the fundamental underpinnings of our directive in Friends of Yamhill County . … See Fox v.

Brown v. Miller

336 Or. App. 460 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 27, 2024

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STEPHEN LEE BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. … Stelz v. Cain, 325 Or App 560, 562, 529 P3d 284 (2023). Here, when plaintiff filed his habeas petition, he also filed a motion for appointment of counsel.

Taylor v. Board of Parole

108 Or. App. 633 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 4, 1991

PER CURIAM The Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision (BOP) held a personal review hearing under ORS 144.122 and OAR 255-40-010 to consider a reduction of petitioner’s prison term. … Under Denham v. Board of Parole, 106 Or App 234, 237 , 806 P2d 1167 (1991), we do not have jurisdiction. Appeal dismissed.

Garcia v. Board of Parole

109 Or. App. 321 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Oct 23, 1991

After the Board issued its order, petitioner timely requested administrative review. However, before the Board ruled on his request, petitioner filed his petition for review in this court. … Betsch v. Board of Parole, 109 Or App 155 , 817 P2d 1356 (1991); Taylor v. Board of Parole, 108 Or App 633 , 816 P2d 714 (1991).

Knotts v. Psychiatric Security Review Board

250 Or. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 13, 2012

We review the board’s order for substantial evidence. ORS 183.482(8)(c). In doing so, we review both the board’s factual findings and its legal conclusions derived from those findings. Salosha, Inc. v. … That is, we assess the board’s reasoning, as expressed in its order. Id. As we have stated, “Our duty is to evaluate the board’s logic, not to supply it.” Castro v.

Hamlin v. Public Employees Retirement Board

273 Or. App. 796 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 23, 2015

1 In the order on review, the Public Employees Retirement Board (PERB) answered those questions no. We agree with PERB and affirm. … Petitioner relies on Rose v. Board of Trustees, 215 Or App 138 , 168 P3d 1204 (2007), in support of her argument that PERS lacked authority to implement the dissolution judgment. That case is inapposite.

Akles v. Board of Parole

318 Or. App. 405 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 16, 2022

Relying on our decisions in Dam v. Board of Parole, 258 Or App 39, 309 P3d 161 (2013), and Nevins v. … That is not the 408 Akles v. Board of Parole case here. Accordingly, as we did in those cases, we reverse and remand for reconsideration.

Ritchie v. Board of Parole

35 Or. App. 711 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 8, 1978

On November 18, 1977, the Board of Parole hearings officer denied the request for a Board appointed attorney to represent him at the parole revocation hearing. … California, 372 US 353 , 83 S Ct 814 , 9 L Ed 2d 811 (1963); Ross v. Moffitt, 417 US 600 , 94 S Ct 2437 , 41 L Ed 2d 341 (1974)), the Supreme Court in Gagnon v. Scarpelli, supra, and Morrisséy v.

West v. Board of Parole

86 Or. App. 616 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 29, 1987

Petitioner seeks review of the Parole Board order which set his parole date. … It might seem — given petitioner’s admissions — that the Board should be able to consider the juvenile adjudications, expunged or not. The Board’s rules provide otherwise.

Templeton v. Board of Parole

350 Or. 574 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 18, 2011

258 P.3d 1240 (2011) 350 Or. 574 TEMPLETON v. BOARD OF PAROLE. (S059494). Supreme Court of Oregon. August 18, 2011. Petition for Review Denied.

Bennett v. Board of Optometry

125 Or. App. 66 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 8, 1993

See Berwick v. AFSD, 74 Or App 460 , 703 P2d 994 (1985). However, an agency is not compelled to excuse a pro se litigant from procedural requirements. … See, e.g., Gill v. Director of Dept. of Ins. and Finance, 107 Or App 669 , 813 P2d 564 (1992). The Board found: “2.

State Land Board v. Heuker

25 Or. App. 137 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 19, 1976

State ex rel Thornton v. Hay, 254 Or 584, 601-602 , 462 P2d 671 (1969) (specially concurring opinion); Corvallis & Eastern R. Co. v. Benson, 61 Or 359, 369-70 , 121 P 418 (1912). Cf., Land Bd. v. … In McAdam v.