Oregon Supreme Court (3 summaries)
Rice v. Rabb
Claims for conversion and replevin "accrue" under ORS 12.080(4) when plaintiff knows or reasonably should know the elements of such claims.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. Backstrand
A mere request for identification made by an officer in the course of an otherwise lawful encounter does not, in and of itself, result in a seizure.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Savastano
A prosecutor’s decision will comply with Article 1, section 20 of the Oregon Constitution as long as there is a rational explanation for the differential treatment that is reasonably related to his or her official task or to the person’s individual situation.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Oregon Court of Appeals (13 summaries)
Eclectic Investment, LLC. v. Patterson
The distinction between active and passive negligence is but one factor to consider when determining whether or not indemnification among co-defendants is proper.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. Adame
If a defendant understands that a refusal to perform verbal field sobriety tests cannot be used against him in a court of law, the defendant is not "compelled" to provide testimonial evidence for the purposes of the self-incrimination clause.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Tilson and Tilson
Modification of spousal support award is warranted upon spouse's remarriage if the remarriage constitutes a substantial, unanticipated change in economic circumstances. Continuation of maintenance support award may be appropriate if the remarriage does not address or fully satisfy the purposes of the original spousal support award.
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law
Conrady v. Lincoln County
An ordinance in Lincoln County, LCC 1.1375(2)(m), which requires a landowner to obtain a conditional use permit prior to opening a "firearms training facility," is not preempted by ORS 166.170, ORS 166.171, or ORS 166.176.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
State v. D.P.
In determining whether or not a circumstance is compelling in the case of a juvenile and thus requiring Miranda warnings, the court will look at the totality of the circumstances.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Alcutt v. Adams Family Food Services, Inc.
The exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Law is unconstitutional as applied to a worker left with no process through which to seek redress for an injury for which a cause of action exists at common law.
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
Dept. of Human Services v. D.A.N.
Parent who fails to meet obligations under an action agreement due to brevity of incarceration allows a court to conclude that parent has not made sufficient progress under ORS 419B.476(2) when reunification would not occur for a minimum of nine months.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
State v. Klontz
Evidential error is not presumed to be prejudicial; a decision can be upheld if the court makes it clear that it did not rely on the disputed evidence in making its decision.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Aponte v. State
If factual findings of a post-conviction court’s ruling remain unchallenged and Defendant is unable to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defense counsel provided ineffective legal assistance, post-conviction relief will be denied.
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
State v. Kingsmith
Evidence incriminating a defendant and obtained during a traffic stop should be suppressed if the officer's reasonable suspicion of criminal activity was not based on actions or characteristics of the defendant.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Kingsmith
Incriminating evidence obtained against a particular defendant during a traffic stop should be suppressed if the officer's reasonable suspicion of criminal activity was not based on actions or characteristics of that defendant.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Marton v. Ater Construction Co., LLC
A party who enters into a settlement with a claimant is not entitled to recover contribution or indemnity from a third-party whose liability is not extinguished by the settlement.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
State v. McClure
Taking a person into custody for a parole violation constitutes an "arrest" for the purposes of the resisting arrest statute, ORS 162.315.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure