Oregon Court of Appeals

Opinions Filed in November 2011

Baggarley v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

When a claimant became aware of his or her work-related injury is a question of fact for the jury to decide in determining the statute of limitations period on a workplace injury claim.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Cruze v. Hudler

A predicate conviction is not a prerequisite to a civil ORICO claim based on racketeering activities. To have a cause of action under ORICO, plaintiff only need demonstrate defendants violation is based on racketeering activity.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

Gordon v. Board of Parole

Under ORS 144.125(3), a parole board may rely on any information contained in the psychological report to find the four elements required to defer release of an offender.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Parole and Post-Prison Supervision

State v. Ayvazov

Where suspicious activity occurs, and it is objectively reasonable that the passenger of a car was recently involved in a crime, the police met its burden to show probable cause when arresting the passenger.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Smith

According to Warm Springs Tribal Reservation law (WSTC 310.120), nontribal officers may arrest tribe members on tribal land following a traffic infraction in the officer's presence and leading to a "hot pursuit" onto the reservation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Indian Law

State v. Volynets-Vasylchenko

Medical treatment recommendations that convey the medical expert's implicit conclusions that a child victim's reports of sexual abuse are credible are inadmissible unless corroborated by physical evidence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

Svidenko v. DMV

When a petitioner files a just cause exception to a timely administrative appeal, the reviewing agency must answer the substantive arguments put forth by the petitioner.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

Fisher v. Walker

To determine an easement’s purpose, the court looks to the wording of the document within the context of the document. An instrument creating an easement that does not convey title to the property, but only subjects it to the uses of the easement, is not a conveyable interest in land.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

State v. Earls

For the purpose of applying the presumptive 13-month sentence under ORS 137.717(b) a conviction in a court-martial does not apply. Where the Court of Appeal finds plain error in the trial court’s failure to merge guilty verdicts on particular counts, the Court will exercise its discretion to correct the error.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Beauchaton v. Employment Dept.

When an employee leaves for their own safety due to a reasonable belief they are being stalked, then they are not disqualified for voluntarily quitting their job without “good cause.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Dinicola v. State

Employees may be exempt from overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act depending on the nature of their work, and the classification of their job.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Housing Authority of Jackson County v. Gates

Where a written lease specifically refers to another writing as being part of the entire agreement, that other writing is part of the lease agreement.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

Leif and Leif

Including income from an inheritance in the calculation of gross income is appropriate when the inheritance is available. Also, averaging a parent's income over several years is appropriate when the income varies from year to year.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

Oregon Corrections Employees v. State of Oregon

Where a collective bargaining agreement authorizes an employer to take certain actions, such actions if unilaterally employed by the employer, do not constitute unfair labor practices.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Rodenbeck and Rodenbeck

In a marriage dissolution, it is not just and proper to reduce the value of a spouse’s share of a marital asset to reflect the taxes the other spouse may owe on the income he or she uses to pay the spouse. Also, a court should not rely on an expert’s value that is based on a guess from a non-expert.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

Siegert v. Crook County

The standard of review for a zoning ordinance is limited to whether the county’s determination is plausible. If the local government plausibly interprets its own regulations that interpretation must be affirmed, unless it is inconsistent with all of the express language or inconsistent with the policies underlying the regulation.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Land Use

State v. Hennagir

Under ORS 161.405(1), a reasonable jury can infer the intent to complete a crime when substantial steps have been taken toward completion, even when there is no evidence of the actual objective.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Jones

OEC 404(4) bars a trial court from excluding evidence under OEC 403,“unless constitutionally required.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. M.W.H.

Warrantless searches may be justified if there is reasonable suspicion and exigent circumstances.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Juvenile Law

State v. Rayburn

Police may use the totality of the circumstances to establish probable cause to arrest a passenger in a stolen car. This assessment establishes the requisite mental state of the passenger to determine whether or not they knew they were in a stolen vehicle and could be arrested.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Ulizzi

Even when information that led to the issuance of a warrant is "stale," a court will give deference to the issuing court and uphold a warrant that may yield potential evidence.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Young

An appellate or post-conviction court may add court appointed attorney fees to a defendant's appeal following a claim for post-conviction relief.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Develop. v. Polk County

Land use decisions made by proper county officials and in accord with statutory and case law of the time shall be upheld despite conflicting previous acts related to the land in question.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Land Use

Dept. of Human Services v. N.S.

A court will not reverse a juvenile court's order of reunification to guardianship, despite a parent's participation in DHS services, when the parent places the child in harm's way.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

SAIF v. Hanscram

The "date of injury" occurs on the date when a claimant becomes disabled or seeks treatment for a compensable condition. A condition becomes compensable when the claimant's work is the major contributing cause of the injury.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Workers Compensation

State v. Chase

A sentence does not violate the proportionality principle of the Oregon Constitution if the defendant would not have received the base sentence for the more serious crime based on his criminal history.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

State v. Condon

The 90-day timeline established by Oregon's criminal restitution statute may be extended for good cause.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Landreth

Good cause to extend the deadline for the imposition of a supplemental judgment exists when the motion is filed within the time period, and further investigation to establish the specific amount of restitution is required.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Martinez

Delay in a motion requesting an amended judgment for restitution meets the “good cause” requirement if it is not due to neglect, inadvertence, or inattentiveness. Awaiting information from a victim's compensation program does constitute "good cause".

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Newman

Driving under the influence of intoxicants is a strict liability offense, and evidence of mental state will be excluded.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Unis

The 90-day timeline established by Oregon's criminal restitution statute may be extended for good cause.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. White

Appeals from supplemental judgments, like other judgments, must be timely for the Court of Appeals to maintain jurisdiction.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

Tieu v. Morgan

Summary judgment of adverse possession will be granted where a claimant can prove, with clear and convincing evidence, that he, through “honest belief” of actual ownership, continuously maintained actual, open, notorious, exclusive and hostile possession of the property for greater than ten years.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

Back to Top