Chou v. Farmers Ins. Exchange
Clauses found in a homeowner's insurance policy that are ambiguous as to their application will be construed against the policy drafter.
Area(s) of Law:- Insurance Law
Dept. of Human Services v. J.C.G.
Despite compliance with a juvenile court't requirements to remove an abusive spouse from the home and submit a safety plan to keep the abused child out of contact with abusive parent, a juvenile court is reasonable in denying a father's motion to dismiss the wardship because the father never acknowledged that the abusive parent caused injury to the child and because the safety plan was not in writing and not yet implemented.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Oregon Education Association v. Parks
Under ORS 31.150(3), the reasonable juror standard is sufficient to satisfy a court's conclusion that there was enough evidence to support a prima facie case.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
State v. Canfield
Consent to search, given before a suspect was told he was free to leave by the officer who stopped him, is an illegal search unless there is a warrant or reasonable suspicion.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Rennells
Under the emergency aid exception to the warrant requirement, officers may enter an area when they have articulable facts indicating a person is threatened with serious physical injury or harm.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Zolotoff
If evidence in the record supports a jury instruction of a lesser-included offense, the State is required to give the instruction to ensure that the jury has a complete statement of the law.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Dept of Human Services v. J.N.
Before denying a permanency plan of reunification, the juvenile court must establish that the evidence shows the plan will cause severe mental and emotional harm to the child.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Jensen v. DuBoff
A trial court abuses its discretion when it dismisses a complaint with prejudice when it has not adequately considered the 4 factors in Ramsey v. Thompson.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Macnab v. State
Under ORS 30.275(9), the two year statute of limitations on a claim of false imprisonment begins to run from the date when the plaintiff is aware of the facts necessary to prove liability.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Schutz v. SAIF Corp.
Under ORS 656.005(7)(a), even if an employee's primary motive for engaging in any social activities outside of the work environment was work related, the employee's choices to drink enough to be intoxicated and then drive home are not work related and thus any injury sustained did not arise from employment. Therefore, workers compensation will not be available for an injured worker in this situation.
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
State v. Huff
Officer's search warrant affidavit based on a small amount of drugs for personal use, combined with evidence that defendant and his roommate are both on post-prison supervision for drug possession, is not enough, by itself, to establish probable cause. The affidavit must provide enough facts to permit a magistrate reasonably to conclude that it is more likely than not that additional evidence of criminal drug activity will be found.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Friend
Summary judgment should not be granted where genuine issues of material fact have not been resolved.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
A & E Security and Electronic Solutions, Inc. v. Fortalesa, Inc.
Under ORS 20.083, attorney fees may be awarded under provisions in a rescinded contract. ORS 20.083 was enacted to restore full reciprocity for awarding attorney fees and it is not limited by the examples in the explanatory clause.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Dept. of Human Services v. C. C.
Under ORS 419B.340(2), the court shall enter a description of what efforts were made to reunite the family and what could have prevented the separation of the family.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Dept. of Human Services v. M.M.B.
An order for guardianship will be upheld if the juvenile court makes the necessary findings of fact as laid out in ORS 419B.476.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Dept. of Human Services v. S.C.S
Jurisdiction in custody cases involving multiple jurisdictions is determined by the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), ORS 109.701 to 109.834. Pursuant to ORS 109.741(1), the court may make an initial custody determination.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Johnson v. Dept. of Public Safety Standards and Training
ORS 135.970(2) imposes a duty solely on the defense attorney to inform a crime victim of the “identity and capacity of the person contacting the victim” and the victim’s other rights under the statute. A crime victim’s constitutional right to refuse an interview request does not include an obligation on the person seeking the interview to inform the victim of that right.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Oregon Education Ass'n v. Oregon Taxpayers United
Under the law of the case doctrine, if an earlier ruling was necessary to the adjudication of an issue before the court, it is binding and conclusive upon both the inferior court in any further steps or proceedings in the same litigation and upon the appellate court itself in any subsequent appeal or other proceeding for review.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Richardson v. Oregon Dept. of Transportation
ORS 809.440(2)(b) does not create an exclusive list of defenses to DMV actions. ORS 809.440(2)(b) merely states possible defenses to a department's actions.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
SERA Architects, Inc. v. Klahowya Condominium, LLC
Pursuant to the Construction Lien Law under ORS 87.005-87.060, a construction lien, if perfected by filing a claim of lien, relates to and encumbers a property as of the beginning of construction or the delivery of materials. Separately, in order to triumph on the affirmative defense of equitable subrogation, a lender must prove that it was ignorant to the existence of an intervening lien, and that its ignorance was not the result of inexcusable ignorance.
Area(s) of Law:- Remedies
State v. Barboe
Under ORS 161.155, Oregon does not recognize the aid-and-abet theory when the Defendant did not plan or commit the crime in question.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Bircher
Delay in court scheduling that can be attributed to the state is reasonable under ORS 135.747 if it does not fall "outside the norm of acceptable court scheduling practices."
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Bradley
OEC 803(18a)(b) intends to ensure an opposing party has reasonable time to prepare for trial in response to hearsay statements made by a victim by requiring notice to the opposing party no later than fifteen days before trial. At a minimum, the rule requires identification of the witness or the means that will be used to introduce the hearsay statement as well as the substance of the hearsay statement or how it will be introduced.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. Carroll
Diversion is not a defense to DUII and the amended criteria for diversion eligibility does not increase DUII punishment.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. G.L.D.
The antimerger statute applies whenever there is a common victim and charge if there are repeated violations separated by enough time for the defendant to renounce his criminal intent. Additionally, evidence to prove market value for purposes of a theft charge may include evidence regarding replacement costs of the property. Finally, for purposes of restitution, the juvenile code references the criminal code and includes insurance companies as victims.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
State v. Hansen
A variance between an indictment and the statute under which Defendant was charged, leads to an acquittal where Defendant has been prejudiced by the discrepancy.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Hudson
Trial court properly denied a motion to suppress when Defendant was properly seized, police entered the house under exigent circumstances, police properly read Defendant his Miranda warnings, and asked only clarifying questions after Defendant equivocally invoked his right to counsel.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Johnson
When the original trial is brought within a reasonable period of time, ORS 135.747 does not regulate the timing of the second trial in the same criminal proceeding.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Wright
For first-degree criminal mistreatment, "physical injury" is an impairment of a physical condition or a substantial amount of pain. Impairment of a physical condition is harm to the body or an inability to use the body or a bodily organ for a certain period of time.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law