Brownstone Homes Condominium Ass'n v. Brownstone Forest Heights, LCC
If a plaintiff engages in a settlement agreement with a defendant that includes a nonexecution covenant releasing the defendant, any assignment of rights by the defendant for claims against defendant's insurer will be subject to the Stubblefield Rule.
Area(s) of Law:- Insurance Law
Doughton v. Morrow
Under ORS 12.110, the statute of limitations does not begin to run at the time of discovery of facts that serve only as a trigger a duty to inquire about whether an injury has occurred. For a claim to relate back to the date of the original complaint, the original complaint must put the reasonable defendant on notice of such an additional basis of liability.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
RJ Enterprises LLC of Oregon v. DCBS
A person subject to the employer’s direction, control, and who provides services for remuneration is a subject worker within the meaning of workers' compensation law.
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
State v. Ehrensing
The evidence return provisions of the Oregon Revised Statutes require that the person the evidence is returned to be lawfully entitled to possess the evidence. Because possessing marijuana is illegal under federal law, the statute does not require it be returned to a defendant.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. McGee
When applying ORS 135.747 in a motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial, the Court uses a two-step approach. First, the Court determines the total amount of delay and subtracts any delay caused by Defendant's application or consent. Second, the Court determines whether the remaining delay is reasonable.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Pinard
Where the defendant does not raise a merger argument at the trial court, he must establish plain error that is apparent on the record and it must be such that the "legal point is obvious, not reasonably in dispute."
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
State v. Stookey
Violating ORS 815.020(1)(a) requires a vehicle to be so sufficiently unsafe that its occupants face a danger of probable harm or loss. A horizontal crack in defendant's windshield did not "endanger any person" under ORS 815.020 and therefore the officer's objective belief was not reasonable.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Tracy v. Nooth
A court may allow reconsideration to clarify its disposition.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Dept. of Human Services v. M.E.
Under ORS 419B.100(1)(c), the juvenile court has jurisdiction when conditions and circumstances are such that the welfare of the children is endangered. The trial court's decision is reviewed de novo, and is measured by the totality of the circumstances.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Herring v. American Medical Response Northwest
"Vulnerable person" under ORS 124.100 includes a temporary incapacitated person. ORS 124.100(2)(b) unambiguously requires the court to triple noneconomic damages resulting from physical abuse.
Area(s) of Law:- Remedies
Hostetter v. Board of Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Under OAR 253-11-004(3), the maximum term of incarceration that may be imposed for any single violation is 90 days for a technical violation, and 180 days for conduct constituting a crime.
Area(s) of Law:- Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
Singh v. McLaughlin
A directed verdict by the trial court will be reversed and remanded by the Court of Appeals if the Court find that the plaintiff presented enough evidence for his claims to be evaluated by a jury.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
State v. Pugh
A person duplicates a sexually explicit image for purposes of ORS 163.684 when he or she downloads it on their personal computer. In addition, venue is proper in the county in which the download took place.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Byers v. Premo
Petitioner must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his counsel failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment, and that petitioner suffered prejudice as a result. While petitioner satisfied the first prong when his counsel failed to tell him that by stipulating to facts at trial, he could face consecutive sentences, he failed to prove that but for counsel's advice, he would not have agreed to a stipulated facts trial.
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Endres v. DMV
On judicial review of a final administrative order, the Court of Appeals reviews whether the order is supported by substantial evidence in the record.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Hughes v. City of Portland
Under ORS 30.275, the tort claims notice requirement, reimbursement to an insurance company counts as partial payment towards plaintiff's claim.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
Malpass and Malpass
The proper calculation of the marital portion of husband's pension should use a fraction of the entire actual pension, not a hypothetical pension, and adjust the wife's survivor benefits.
Area(s) of Law:- Family Law
Papworth v. DLCD
Under Section 6(6)(f) of Measure 49, a landowner is not allowed to build more home sites on her property if, at the owner's acquisition date, the zoning ordinance did not allow for the establishment of more dwellings even if a "sunset provision" was present in the zoning ordinance.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
State v. Cluver
Criminal defendants are entitled to have lesser-included offenses included in jury instructions despite the likelihood of being convicted of the greater offense.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Gilbert
For a jury trial to be properly waived, the defendant must act knowingly and voluntarily and mere reference to such a waiver in the record is not sufficient.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Pirtle
To fall within the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, the automobile must be mobile at the time the police discover that it was connected with a crime.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Preuitt
An expert witness may not testify as to the credibility of another witness. An expert may testify to matters that would assist a jury in reaching a conclusion, but may not include her own conclusions as to the witness' truthfulness.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Tilton v. Lee
Under ORS 116.103, reduction of a requested attorney fee award by a trial court does not constitute an objection in an estate proceeding.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Underwood and Mallory
An error will not be reversed on appeal when the party alleging the error was instrumental in bringing it about.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Grabhorn Inc v. Washington County
Courts may not decide land use decisions unless they fall into the exceptions listed in ORS 197.015(b). ORS 197.825 gives Land Use Board of Appeals exclusive jurisdiction over land use decisions.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Cavitt v. Coursey
Under ORS 138.580, "documentary evidence" is satisfied by an affidavit in support of a Petitioner's claim for post-conviction, and is enough evidence to support a claim for relief in Petitioner's claim for post-conviction relief.
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Cron v. Zimmer
An agreement is not fully integrated, and the parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of prior oral agreements, if the prior oral agreement is consistent with the subsequent writing and the prior oral agreement is the kind of agreement that would naturally be made separately from the writing.
Area(s) of Law:- Contract Law
Deberry v. Summers
Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-attorney after he filed a motion under ORCP 47 E because the witness plaintiff planned to call had no personal knowledge of the events; therefore no genuine issue of material fact existed, and summary judgment was proper.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Dept. of Human Services v. N. P.
A juvenile court may not continue a wardship if the jurisdictional facts on which it is based have ceased to exist.
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Gearhart v. Public Utilities Commission of Oregon
Unless a court gives direction to the contrary, an agency has discretion to act within its authority, as granted by the legislature.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
State v. Aitken
Under ORS 161.067(3), criminal violations involving the same conduct against the same victim will merge unless the violations can be separated by a sufficient pause in the defendant's criminal conduct that would allow an opportunity to renounce the criminal intent.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Cam
Posting signs identifying one’s property as “private” is insufficient in manifesting a clear intent to exclude casual visitors and therefore evidence obtained from police observations may be admitted.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Molette
To establish plain error, a defendant must establish that a point of law is obvious, not merely that a point of law is reasonably disputed.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Roberts
A plea of no contest to a municipal violation constitutes a conviction for purposes of expunction under ORS 137.225(5)(e)
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
State v. Stephens
Evidence of uncharged incidents of sexual conduct between the victim and the defendant are admissible under OEC 404(4).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Topaz v. Board of Examiners for Engineering
Signing a complaint as "P.E." for professional engineer, when one lacks an active license, in a complaint regarding a public body's sewer rehabilitation plans is enough to constitute a violation of Oregon's professional engineering statute, because there is no mens rea requirement in ORS 672.045.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law