State v. Salkoski
An inventory policy may lawfully authorize police officers to open closed containers that are either designed to hold valuables or are likely to contain them. See State v. Hite, 266 Or App 710, 720, 338 P3d 803 (2014).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Schmitz
Warrantless stops by police require reasonable suspicion (combination of an officer’s subjective and objective belief), by a showing of specific and articulable facts “particularized to the individual based on the individual’s own conduct”, that they had, or were about to, commit a crime. State v. Farrar, 252 Or App 256, 260, 287 P3d 1124 (2012); State v. Davis, 286 Or App 528, 532, 400 P3d 994 (2017); State v. Holdorf, 355 Or 812, 825, 333 P3d 982 (2014). An officer’s training and experience cannot contribute to the requisite particularized facts. Id. 260-62. The emergency aid exception justifies warrantless searches when there’s an “objectively reasonable belief…that a warrantless entry is necessary to” provide immediate or imminent aid. State v. Baker, 350 Or 641, 649, 260 P3d 476 (2011).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Underhill v. Prock
In Morgan v. Hart, the court explained that "ORS 36.175 requires the circuit court to perform two acts with respect to a way of necessity claim: (1) to determine whether or not a need has been demonstrated for the granting of a way of necessity; and (2) to enter an order granting or denying the necessity. [Morgan v. Hart, 325 Or 348, 354 (1997)].”
Area(s) of Law:- Property Law
State v. McDougal
A trial court's contempt judgment should be reversed and remanded when "the trial court ha[s] applied an incorrect standard in determining that the defendant ha[s] violated a restraining order." State v. Heal, 298 Or App 806, ___ P3d ___ (2019).
Area(s) of Law:- Family Abuse Prevention Act
Bank of New York Mellon v. Delaney
The “holder” of a blank indorsement for a “promissory note secured by a trust deed” possesses the “right to enforce the note.” ORS 73.0301 (UCC §3-301); Nationstar Mortgage, LCC v. Peper, 278 Or App 594, 596, 377 P3d 678 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Business Law
Hulme v. City of Eugene
Pursuant to Eugene Code EC 9.2750, net density is defined as “the number of dwelling units per acre of land in actual residential use and reserved for the exclusive use of the residents.”
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Nelson v. Driver and Motor Vehicle Services
“A defendant's ‘mere acquiescence’ to police authority does not constitute voluntary consent.” State v. Stanley, 287 Or App 399, 407 (2017) (quoting State v. Berg, 223 Or App 387, 392 (2008)).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Dearmitt
“Where multiple charges arise from a single criminal episode, ‘criminal conduct that violates only one statutory provision will yield only one conviction unless the so called ‘antimerger’ statute, ORS 161.067, operates so as to permit the entry of multiple convictions.’” State v. Reeves, 250 Or App 294, 304, 280 P3d 994 (2012); see also ORS 161.067(3).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. McBride
“Under the unavoidable lull rule, whether an officer’s inquiry about a matter unrelated to the reasons for a traffic stop unlawfully extends the stop depends on whether the officer makes the inquiry instead of expeditiously proceeding with the steps necessary to complete the stop.” State v. Nims, 248 Or App 708, 713, 274 P3d 235, rev den, 352 Or 378 (2012).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. Morrow
"OEC 404(3) unquestionably forbids the admission of evidence solely to show propensity or that the defendant is a bad person." State v. Johns, 301 Or 535, 548-49, 725 P2d 312 (1986).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Bates v. Andaluz Waterbirth Center
“To hold a third-party beneficiary bound to an arbitration agreement, the third party beneficiary must have 'manifested assent to be bound by the agreement by ratifying it or asserting to a claim for relief under the agreement.'" Drury v. Assisted Living Concepts, Inc., 245 Or App 217, 224, 262 P3d 1162 (2011).
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law
Bearden v. N. W. E., Inc.
"[W]hen the plaintiff claims that a co-worker created a hostile environment through sexual harassment, the employer is liable if the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt remedial action ***." Harris v. Pameco Corp., 170 Or App 164, 177, 12 P3d 534 (2000).
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
Cohron v. Board of Parole
ORS 144.335 gives [the Court] jurisdiction to review a “final order” of the board on the petition of a person who is “adversely affected or aggrieved” by the order. ORS 144.335(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Dept. of Human Services v. D. R. D.
A psychological evaluation is authorized as a component of treatment or training under ORS 419B.387.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
L. M. B. v. Cohn
To obtain an SPO against a person, a petitioner must demonstrate the factors under ORS 30.866(1) by a preponderance of the evidence; unless a respondent admits to a petitioner’s allegations, the factual allegations made in an SPO petition are not evidence. Falkenstein v. Falkenstein, 236 Or App 445, 449, 236 P3d 798 (2010).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Stalking Protective Order
Pride Disposal Co. v. Valet Waste, LLC
"[T]he 'collection' and 'transportation' of garbage. . . occurs when an approved collection container is collected from a designated pickup point by. . . collection vehicles on the scheduled day and then transported over the city streets to an authorized facility" [under the Tigard Municipal Code].
Area(s) of Law:- Municipal Law
State v. Brown
“The articulated facts need not support certainty that a suspect is engaged in criminal activity; rather, based on those specific facts, ‘a reviewing court must [be able to] conclude that the officer’s subjective belief could be true, as a matter of logic.’” State v. Fuller, 296 Or App 425, 429 (2017) quoting State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 184 (2017).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Doyle
A defendant may, in front of a jury, cross-examine a plaintiff about previously made accusations if "(1) the plaintiff recanted; (2) the defendant demonstrates to the court that those accusations were false; or (3) there is some evidence the plaintiff made prior false accusations, unless the 'probative value of the evidence…is substantially outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusion, embarrassment or delay.'” State v. LeClair, 83 Or App 121, 129-30, 730 P2d 9 (1986).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. Steele
“For an error to be plain error, it must be an error of law, obvious and not reasonably in dispute, and apparent on the record, without requiring the court to choose among competing inferences.” State v. Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 629, 317 P3d 889 (2013).
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure