Oregon Supreme Court (6 summaries)
Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Energy Facility Siting Council
When rulemaking, and upon request, an administrative agency "…shall provide a statement that identifies the objective of the rule and a statement of how the agency will subsequently determine whether the rule is in fact accomplishing that objective.” ORS 183.335(3)(d).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
State v. Gensitskiy
“When the same conduct or criminal episode, though violating only one statutory provision involves two or more victims, there are as many separately punishable offenses as there are victims.” ORS 161.067(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Dep’t of Human Servs. v. T.M.D.
"In a termination proceeding, if a parent’s conduct justifies termination, then the best interests of the child are considered explicitly, and could even then prevent termination from occurring.” State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Beasley, 314 Or 444, 451-52, 840 P2d 78 (1992).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
State v. Gutierrez-Medina
Comparative fault is not available as a defense for conduct involving "culpability beyond gross negligence." Johnson v. Tilden, 278 Or 11, 17, 562 P2d 1188 (1977); Cook v. Kinzua Pine Mills Co. et al, 207 Or 34, 42, 293 P2d 717 (1956).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co.
“For every compensable injury, the insurer *** shall cause to be provided medical services for conditions caused in material part by the injury ***” ORS 656.245(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
State v. Lien/Wilverding
If a state officer requests a private person to search a particular place or thing, and if that private person acts because of and within the scope of the officer’s request, then [Or Const] Article I, section 9, will govern the search. State v. Tucker, 330 Or 85, 90, 997 P2d 182 (2000)
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Oregon Court of Appeals (13 summaries)
State v. Payne
Jury concurrence is necessary “when the indictment charges a single violation of a crime but the evidence permits the jury to find multiple, separate occurrences of that crime.” State v. Pipkin, 354 Or 513, 517, 316 P3d 255 (2013).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Evensen
“The prohibitions in [ORS 165.540(1)(a)-(c)] do not apply to subscribers or members of their family who perform the acts prohibited in subsection (1) of this section in their homes.” ORS 165.540(3).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Calpine Energy Solutions LLC v. PUC
Pursuant to ORS 757.210, "the PUC ‘may not authorize a rate or schedule of rates that is not fair, just and reasonable.’” ORS 757.210(1)(a).
Area(s) of Law:- Business Law
Dept. of Human Services v. M. A. H.
Where . . . the children 'have special needs and are healthily bonded to their foster parents, the issue is . . . whether the parent has waited too long to reform in light of the child’s pressing needs.'” State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. A. L. S., 228 Or App 700, 723, 209 P3d 817, rev den, 347 Or 43 (2009).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Columbia Riverkeeper v. Columbia County
“[W]hen a local government takes a reasons exception, ‘plan and zone designations must limit the uses, density, public facilities and services, and activities to only those that are justified in the exception.’” OAR 660-004-0018(4)(a).
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Rinne v. PSRB
"An assertion of a finding of fact as part of an explanation for disregarding evidence is subject to attack if the fact relied upon is not, itself, supported by substantial evidence." Garcia v. Boise Cascade Corp., 309 Or 292, 296, 787 P2d 884 (1990). "The court shall set aside or remand the order if the court finds that the order is not supported by substantial evidence in the record." See ORS 183.482(8)(c).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Commitment
Pelican Bay v. Western Timber
To constitute a trade secret under ORS 646.461(4), information must both (1) gain value because it is not generally known and (2) be the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain that secrecy. Kaib’s Roving R.PH. Agency, Inc. v. Smith, 237 Or App 96, 103, 239 P3d 247 (2010).
Area(s) of Law:- Trade Secrets
Nancy Doty, Inc. v. WildCat Haven, Inc.
“Persons listed in [ORS 656.018(3)] enjoy a broad grant of immunity for workplace injuries, even if they are acting in more than one capacity at the time of the injury.” Varland v. Smith, 112 Or App 271, 274, 828 P2d 1053, rev den, 313 Or 628 (1992). ORS 656.018(3)(d) excepts parties from immunity only where they acted “wholly outside the capacity of their immunity.”
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
State v. Williams
The Court of Appeals may only review the denial of a motion for a new trial if “the motion is based upon juror misconduct or newly discovered evidence.” State v. Sullens, 314 Or 436, 440, 839 P2d 708 (1992) (emphasis in original); see generally State v. Alvarez-Vega, 240 Or App 616, 619, 251 P3d 199, rev den, 350 Or 297 (2011) (concluding that the defendant's constitutional challenge was beyond the scope of our review because he failed to show how his claim fell within ORCP 64 B(4)).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Hammel v. McCulloch
In order to prevail in a legal malpractice action, “[A] plaintiff must show, not only that the attorney was negligent, but also that the result would have been different except for the negligence.” Watson v. Meltzer, 247 Or App 558, 565, 270 P3d 289 (2011).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Dept. of Human Services v. D. L. G.
Under ORS 419B.476(5)(d), "the person or entity seeking to assert one of the exceptions in ORS 419B.498(2) bears the burden of proving that an exception to the prompt filing of a termination petition applies." Dept. of Human Services v. S.J.M., 283 Or App 367, 393-94, 388 P3d 417(2017), rev'd, 364 Or 37, 430 P3d 1021 (2018).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Martinez v. Delgado-Galban
A plaintiff in a personal injuries case can recover reasonable medical expenses but there must be some evidence that the charges are reasonable. Tuohy v. Columbia Steel Co., 61 Or 527, 532, 122 P 36 (1912).
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. Harrop
“Probable cause exists if, at the time of the stop, the officer subjectively believes that [an] infraction [has] occurred and if that belief is objectively reasonable under the circumstances.” State v. Isley, 182 Or App 186, 190, 48 P3d 179 (2002).
Area(s) of Law:- Traffic Infractions