Clark v. Gilstrap
The statute of limitations for a personal injury claim under ORS 12.110(1) is subject to the “discovery rule,” such that the statute of limitations does not begin until a plaintiff knows or reasonably should have known that they were injured and that the defendant caused the injury.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. B. I. Z. V.
Under ORS 163.165(1)(e), a person commits third-degree assault when the person “while being aided by another person actually present, intentionally or knowingly causes physical injury to another.”
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Orvis
“To that end, "inquiring into the prospective jurors' potential interest or bias in a case is a legitimate way of selecting fair-minded individuals to serve on the jury." That means that jury selection necessarily "entails an inherent risk that the panel of prospective jurors will be exposed to information revealed by individual prospective jurors who are excused from the panel for cause." State v. Evans, 344 Ore. 358 (2008).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Skotland
To preserve an issue on appeal, the defendant must have adequately explained the basis of their objection at the lower court.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. A. E. A.
ORS 419C.450(1)(a) requires the juvenile court to award restitution for “injury, loss or damage” caused by the adjudicated youth and suffered by the victim. The juvenile court must award restitution when there is sufficient evidence of criminal activity, economic damages, and a causal relationship between the criminal activity and the economic damages. State v. C. A. M.-D., 312 Or App 4.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
State v. Martin-Thanislaus
A conspiracy to commit a crime requires proof that, with the requisite intent, two or more people agreed to commit a crime punishable as a felony. ORS 161.450(1). A conspiracy to tamper with a witness requires proof that a person agreed (and intended) to seek to induce a witness either to offer false sworn testimony in an official proceeding or to unlawfully withhold sworn testimony in such a proceeding. ORS 162.285
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Walker
ORS 162.285(1)(a) provides that a person commits the crime of witness tampering if the person “knowingly induces or attempts to induce a witness or a person the person believes may be called as a witness to offer false testimony or unlawfully withhold any testimony.” Read in context, “unlawfully” modifies the phrase “withhold any testimony,” indicating that the legislature intended to exempt behavior such as advising a witness to exert a lawful privilege. State v. Bailey, 346 Or 551 (2009).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Sutherland v. Fhuere
“To succeed on a claim of inadequate assistance of counsel under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, petitioner must show by a preponderance of the evidence facts demonstrating that (1) counsel failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment,” and (2) counsel’s failure prejudiced petitioner, meaning “counsel’s failure had a tendency to affect the result of [the] trial,” commonly referred to as the deficiency and prejudice prongs. Bacon v. Cain, 327 Or App 673 (2023).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Kharma and Aljundi
Any action, suit, or proceeding may be prosecuted or defended by a party in person, or by attorney, unless otherwise specifically provided by law. ORS 9.320. Thus, in a dissolution trial, a party can forego appearing in person and may be represented by an attorney instead.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
McGeehan v. Cunningham
“To show that circumstances detrimental to the child exist if relief is denied, the nonparent must demonstrate that the circumstances of living with the legal parent post a serious present risk of psychological, emotional, or physical harm to the child”. G.J.L. v. A.K.L., 244 Or App 523, 532.
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law
State v. Atwood
“A person commits the offense of driving a motor vehicle while using a mobile electronic device if the person, while driving a motor vehicle on a highway or premises open to the public: (a) Holds a mobile electronic device in the person’s hand; or (b) uses a mobile electronic device for any purpose.” ORS 811.507(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. M.M.-B.
"The court shall also advise the person of the right to subpoena witnesses and to suitable legal counsel possessing skills and experience commensurate with the nature of the allegations and complexity of the case during the proceedings…” ORS 427.265(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Brown v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC.
A hospital may be a "seller" that is "engaged in the business of selling" if it administers a dangerous, defective drug while providing healthcare services, and thus subject to strict products liability under the terms of ORS 30.920(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
Perkins v. Fhuere
Counsel’s failure to object to the trial court’s enhanced sentences based on “judicially-found facts, instead of jury-found facts as required under Appendi v. New Jersey * * * entitle[s] [petitioner] to a new sentencing proceeding pertaining to those counts.”
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law