Oregon Supreme Court (6 summaries)
State v. Babson
A Legislative Administration Committee (LAC) guideline prohibiting overnight stay on the Capitol grounds does not violate rights to expression and assembly found in Article 1, Sections 8 and 26, or the Oregon Constitution.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Purdy v. Deere and Company
ORS 19.415(2) does not preclude instructional or evidentiary errors from the gambit of potential claims for reversal.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Herald and Steadman
A court may consider the existence or absence, but not the value, of anticipated Social Security benefits as factors relevant to a just and proper division of property pursuant to ORS 107.105(f).
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law
Moro v. State of Oregon
Based on the rule of necessity, a judge may participate in decision making pertaining to the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) despite having a substantial economic interest therein.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Rasmussen v. Rosenblum
Pursuant to ORS 250.035(2), a statement describing the result of a "yes" vote in a ballot caption must be simple, understandable, and not more than 25 words.
Area(s) of Law:- Ballot Titles
State v. Fuller
Violations do not preclude a defendant from asserting a right to a jury trial pursuant to Oregon Constitution Article 1, section 11.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Oregon Court of Appeals (14 summaries)
State v. Cale
Criminal charges may not be merged where "sufficient pause" between acts is not present.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Goetzinger
Bruising to an infant child alone does not constitute sufficient evidence to show medical care was necessary under ORS 163.200.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. Peters
Asking a person lawfully stopped for a traffic violation the location of a known associate that is at large does not constitute an unlawful extension of the stop via Article 1, Section 9 of the Oregon Constitution.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Dept of Human Services v. N.B
A marked improvement in mental health condition is not necessarily sufficient to overcome the Court's wardship as to children.
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law
Relling v. Khorenian
A multiplicity of access points to a landlocked parcel defeats an easement of necessity claim.
Area(s) of Law:- Property Law
State ex rel Dewberry v. Kitzhaber
The Governor has broad powers to enter into tribal-state gaming compacts with various Native American tribes residing in Oregon.
Area(s) of Law:- Tribal Law
State v. Wynne
A motion to suppress evidence on the grounds of unlawful seizure must establish a causal connection between the unlawful seizure and the discovery of challenged evidence.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Portland Columbia Symphony v. Employment Dept.
Factors indicating that an employer is only in direction and control of a desired result over its workers, rather than authority to control the way that work is performed by the workers, favors a finding that the workers are independent contractors.
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
State v. Jones
Improper admission of prior bad acts evidence is subject to review under the "plain error" standard.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
PacifiCorp v. SimplexGrinnel
Transposition of parties in the Court's hypotheticals pertaining to a contractual indemnification clause were immaterial.
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law
State v. Kinslow
Under ORS 163.225(1)(a), movement of an individual from one room to another within the same house does not meet the asportation element.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Ashbaugh
For the purposes of ORS 162.155, an escapee enters into the constructive custody of authorities upon verbal notice of a warrant for his arrest and the intent of authorities to place him under arrest.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Monro
The "shift-to-column-I" rule is subject to Measure 11 when a Measure 11 sentence is imposed consecutively with another offense. Where a sentencing conflict between "shift-to-column-I" and Measure 11 exists, the sentence shall be the greater of the two prescribed regimes.
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
McKinnon v. McKinnon
Minor changes in monthly income does not constitute a substantial change in circumstances for the purpose of assessing spousal support obligations.
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law