State v. Yocom
Former ORS § 802.093 (2021) did not make the 2020 traffic stop invalid for lack of probable cause because ORS 810.410(3)(b) authorizes police to stop a person for a traffic violation and investigate the violation even when the officer is not authorized to issue a citation.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Weaver v. Highberger
A trial court's termination of continuing jurisdiction in a habeas case is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Barrera v. Employment Dept.
Under ORS 657.176(2)(a), a person is disqualified from receiving benefits if the Employment Department finds that the person "[h]as been discharged for misconduct connected with work[.]" The department defines misconduct to be "a willful or wantonly negligent violation of the standards of behavior which an employer has the right to expect of an employee[.]" OAR 471-030-0038(3)(a).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Thomsen v. Board of Parole
The board’s charge under ORS 163A.100 is to classify sex offenders into one of three notification levels based on their risk of reoffending at the time of the assessment. The 2013 Legislative Assembly, which enacted ORS 163A.100, intentionally enacted “a statute that tasked the board with assessing present risk.”
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
YRC Worldwide, Inc. v. Corrigan
We are further persuaded that, in light of the statute’s enactment history and the removal of a “living apart” requirement from the first sentence, the legislature did not intend “living separate and apart” to be a prerequisite under the first sentence of the statute.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Bean v. Oregon Health Authority
Under OAR 309-114-0010(1)(b)(C), a state institution may administer that medication to a patient without the patient’s informed consent for “good cause” by demonstrating the three factors relevant under OAR 309-114-0020(1)(a)-(c).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Creekside Valley Farms v. Dept. of Agriculture
“Implicit in the requirement that orders be supported by substantial evidence is an additional requirement that they be supported by substantial reason. An order is supported by substantial reason when it articulates a rational connection between the facts and the legal conclusions it draws from them…”. SAIF v. Coria, 371 Or 1, 12 (2023).
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Dept. of Human Services v. M. B.
Agency efforts are reviewed by focusing on DHS's conduct, measuring the reasonableness of those efforts through the lens of the adjudicated bases for jurisdiction, and basing the review on the totality of the circumstances. Parental progress toward safe family reunification is measured by what the parent has done to ameliorate the circumstances that led to juvenile court jurisdiction. ORS 419B.476(2)(a).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Fitzgerald v. Rogue Agrisource LLC
"Clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time on its own motion or on the motion of any party and after such notice to all parties who have appeared, if any, as the court orders." ORCP 71 A.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
State v. Ruiz
"Under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life" means "unconcern in a very high degree, exceeding the ordinary, that an act might cause the death of a human being." State v. Downing, 276 Ore. App. 68 (2016). By its plain text and with limited exception, OAR 213-008-0002(2) prohibits using factual aspects that serve as an element of a crime to justify a departure sentence for that crime.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law