Case law

State v. Ware

79 Or. 367 · Oregon Supreme Court · Feb 8, 1916

It requires no argument to establish the truth that this is a proper exercise of the police power. … The state owes a duty in this regard just as clearly as it does to protect the ignorant and the unwary from the machination of the confidence man or the extortion of the highwayman, and if the lender under such circumstances

Haines v. City of Forest Grove

54 Or. 443 · Oregon Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1909

It will thus be seen that the manner of proceeding is clearly indicated in the general act. … It is a well-established rule that pleadings, when tested by demurrer, must be construed most strongly against the pleader.

Barrett v. Coast Range Plywood

294 Or. 641 · Oregon Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1983

Oregon cases have considered the requirement for expert medical testimony in establishing workers’ disability. … Clearly the field of specialization of a competent medical witness affects the weight to be accorded his evidence, not its admissibility, and the Commission is the judge of the weight of the evidence.” 509 P2d at 633 .

Adair, Adm'x v. Valley Flying Service

196 Or. 479 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1952

“That plaintiff is now the duly appointed, qualified and acting administratrix of the estate of Darius C. Adair, deceased. “II. … Contributory negligence must appear in plaintiff’s evidence so clearly as to disprove the cause of action stated in the petition, * * (Italics ours.)

Farnworth v. Rossetto

285 Or. App. 10 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 26, 2017

It *17 provided that if, based on a review of the application, the city’s finance officer determined that the applicant did not qualify for the issuance of a license, the finance officer was required to notify the applicant … The city did not raise discretionary-function immunity as a defense or as a ground for summary judgment. See ORS 30.265(6)(c).

Northwest Advancement v. Bureau of Labor

96 Or. App. 133 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 12, 1989

Appellants argue that the statute only *139 authorizes WHC to establish suitable hours of employment, not to prohibit employment altogether. Again, we disagree. Appellants rely on Ore. Newspaper Pub. v. … Former OAR 839-21-107 provided that minors employed as newspaper carriers and newspaper vendors were not subject to the administrative regulations promulgated under ORS 653.305. 8 Exemption from regulation is clearly an immunity

Gonyea v. Gonyea

232 Or. 367 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 7, 1962

The uncontradieted testimony of the plaintiff established that the defendant’s frequent visits adversely affected the children in a number of ways. … We are of the opinion that the mere putting into operation of a decree may in some cases qualify as a change of circumstances.

State v. Branch

243 Or. App. 309 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 1, 2011

In that regard, the court stated: "`[N]o particular reason of logic or good sense exists to immunize particular areas or principles simply on the basis of longevity or the fact that their introduction antedated imposition … Thus, this qualified concurrence. That said, and to be sure, invocation of judicial notice in this case is hardly routine either. Indeed, it is exceptional.

Kilminster v. Day Management Corp.

133 Or. App. 159 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 22, 1995

In this case, the statutory source of the immunity is ORS 656.018. … In both cases, clearly there is no legal bar to bringing the action, but in both, the statutory immunity could be raised as a defense.

Cox v. Northwest Regional Education Service District

District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 23, 2024

Thus, qualified immunity may apply to their conduct. Plaintiffs cite no factually analogous cases showing that the applicable law was clearly established. … Because the rights Plaintiffs assert were not clearly established when they were allegedly violated, Defendants Goldman and Simons are entitled to qualified immunity. VIII.

Nordenstrom v. Corizon Health, Inc.

District Court, D. Oregon · Jun 18, 2021

The qualified immunity analysis requires a court to address two questions: (1) whether the facts alleged or shown by the plaintiff establish a constitutional violation and (2) whether the right at issue was clearly established … For the purposes of the qualified immunity analysis, the Court will consider whether the right at issue here was clearly established on November 3, 2016.

Hoge v. Korn

District Court, D. Oregon · Aug 9, 2021

Plaintiff does not provide a basis for his objection to Judge Russo’s recommended finding that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Judge Russo’s recommended finding on qualified immunity, therefore, is reviewed for clear error.

Norgren v. PSRB

344 Or. App. 617 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 5, 2025

is considered to have a qualifying mental disorder. … But a mere “possibility” that cannot be “discounted” is insufficient to establish “danger” based on a mental disorder that is in remission.

State Ex Rel Northwest Medical Laboratories, Inc. v. Wilcox

10 Or. Tax 181 · Oregon Tax Court · Dec 11, 1985

Petitioner believes that the property used by the hospital laboratories does not qualify for property tax exemption because of the laboratories’ outside work. … Knowing that exemptions are strictly construed and that those who seek to have their property exempt must clearly bring themselves within the exemption and, further, that the party claiming exemption has the burden of proof

Croshaw v. Koninklijke Nedlloyd, B. v. Rijswijk

398 F. Supp. 1224 · District Court, D. Oregon · Jul 31, 1975

They impose higher compensation payments upon the stevedore, but immunize him from redemption actions by the vessel. … If notice is not provided and the stevedore’s lien is determined to qualify him for intervention of right, he may be able to intervene even after final judgment.

In Re Kld

228 Or. App. 70 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 29, 2009

According to DHS, the testimony by the other expert witnesses clearly supports the trial court's finding beyond a reasonable doubt. … The second sentence of ORS 419B.365(4), read without the phrase beginning with "including" that is set off by two commas, clearly states that, despite the clear and convincing standard of proof specified in that statute's

Campbell v. Aldrich

159 Or. 208 · Oregon Supreme Court · Mar 31, 1938

It is also equally well established that the intention of the legis *214 lature thus to create contractual obligations, resulting in extinguishment to a certain extent of governmental powers, must clearly and unmistakably … It is unquestionably the function of government to establish and maintain public schools.

State Ex Rel. Brewster v. Ostrander

212 Or. 177 · Oregon Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1957

The act authorizing the creation of non-profit corporations clearly intends that such corporations shall have members. … Ordinarily the directors of a corporation continue in office until their successors are elected and qualified.

Kane v. City of Beaverton

202 Or. App. 431 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Nov 2, 2005

In other districts, all qualified voters were entitled to vote on board membership. In still other districts, school board members were appointed. … Other reasons are to improve administrative efficiency or provide municipal services more efficiently. * * * [I]t is not hard to imagine that in most if not all cases, establishing city rather than county jurisdiction over

In Re Ott

69 B.R. 1 · District Court, D. Oregon · Feb 24, 1986

Accordingly, applying the rationale established by this court in Mace, [In re] Mendenhall [ 4 B.R. 127 (D.Or.1980)] and Hebert this court concludes that the debtors’ interest in the plan does not qualify as exempt under ORS … STANDARD OP REVIEW The conclusions of law of the bankruptcy court are reviewed de novo, but the findings of fact will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.