Oregon Supreme Court

Opinions Filed in November 2011

Rasmussen v. Kroger

Ballot initiatives that substantively change existing law must directly address in the ballot title the substantive change the initiative proposes to address. Additionally, the measure must address the substantive effect of a "yes" or "no" vote.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Ballot Titles

State v. Haugen

The Court is permitted to issue a writ of mandamus when a judge of a lower court has not followed the statutorily required procedures. Once the judge sufficiently complies with the writ, the Court may dismiss the writ.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

Kaseberg v. Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP

A jury could find that when a lawyer informs their client that a breach of contract occurred, an objectively reasonable person would not suspect their attorney committed legal malpractice, thus causing their client's damages.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tort Law

State v. Glushko/Little

When a defendant’s failure to appear for a hearing results in the delay of prosecution without the defendant’s consent, the delay may be considered reasonable. The state is not obliged to dismiss the charges against the defendant, despite failing to use every available means to locate them.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Swanson

A jury's authority to find a defendant guilty of a crime, the commission of which is necessarily included in that with which the defendant is charged, extends only to an offense for which a prison sentence is authorized.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

ZRZ Realty v. Beneficial Fire and Casualty Ins.

The 2005 amendment to ORS 742.001 that created an exemption for surplus lines insurance policies to the rule that in certain instances plaintiffs may collect attorney fees from an insurance company, does not apply to claims filed before the effective date of the amendment.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Attorney Fees

Back to Top