Willamette Law Online

(30 summaries)

Ross Sutherland

Oregon Supreme Court

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Doe v. Lake Oswego School DistrictTort Law: For a tort claim to accrue, a plaintiff must have discovered "not only the conduct of the defendant, but also the tortious nature of that conduct." Whether the nature of the defendant's act is generally known is a question of fact. The circumstances to consider include: plaintiff's status as a minor, the relationship between the parties, and the nature of the harm suffered.(03-07-2013)
Morgan v. Sisters School District #6Civil Procedure: To properly have standing, three considerations must be met: (1) there must be "some injury or other impact upon a legally recognized interest beyond an abstract interest in the correct application or the validity of a law;" (2) the injury must be real or probable, not hypothetical or speculative; and (3) the court's decision must have a practical effect on the rights that the plaintiff is seeking to vindicate.(01-17-2013)

Oregon Court of Appeals

TitleExcerptFilling Date
State v. WebbCriminal Law: A structure is a "building" under ORS 164.205(1) if it has been adapted for carrying on a business. (04-02-2014)
Tolle v. FrankePost-Conviction Relief: A petition for post-conviction relief that meets the requirements of ORS 138.580 should not be dismissed.(03-19-2014)
Martin v. GomesTrusts and Estates: An expectancy interest is distinct from a property interest. An order relating to division of assets that addresses only property interests will not contravene a designated beneficiary's right to receive funds as an expectancy interest.(02-26-2014)
State v. BaxCriminal Law: When an indictment uses the language of a specific intent, required by a statute, the court should not charge a defendant with lesser-included offenses that have different specific intent or elements than the statute (02-12-2014)
State v. GronerCriminal Procedure: An individual suspected of DUII has only the right to a reasonable opportunity to contact an attorney, not the right to have an attorney present; therefore, the presence of an attorney as a condition to submitting to a breath test constitutes a refusal.(12-26-2013)
Leloff and FongFamily Law: Retroactive child support may not be awarded solely under a petition pursuant to ORS 109.103 where there is no filiation action.(11-20-2013)
State v. MercierCriminal Procedure: Under ORS 135.747, an argument that a certain amount of delay is attributable to the State and is reasonable will fail if more time is attributable to the State and no argument has been made that it is also reasonable delay.(10-30-2013)
State v. RoelleEvidence: Under OEC 404(3), evidence of a prior criminal conviction used to prove the intent element of a crime, when the defendant denies the act took place, requires a jury instruction limiting them to first find the defendant committed the act before considering the prior conviction for intent.(10-16-2013)
State v. CurrinCriminal Procedure: A plain, white envelope does not intrinsically suggest that it contains contraband, and therefore the plain-view doctrine requirement that in item's incriminating character be immediately apparent is not met.(10-02-2013)
Jenkins v. Parole and Post-Prison SupervisionParole and Post-Prison Supervision: ORS 144.335(3) requires a parole board to provide an inmate with some explanation of the rationale for concluding that the inmate's parole date should be postponed.(09-05-2013)
Vigor Industrial, LLC v. AyresWorkers Compensation: A "combined condition" is compensable only if the otherwise compensable injury is the major contributing cause of the combined condition disability or the major contributing cause of the need for treatment of the combined condition as compared to the contributions from the preexisting conditions. (08-07-2013)
Rucker v. RuckerContract Law: A substituted contract must show the intent of the parties to substitute the new promise for the original liability. Recording the agreement in court and signing a memorialization is sufficient to show such intent.(07-17-2013)
State v. Lovaina-BurmudezCriminal Procedure: The retention and processing of clothing as evidence exceeds the scope of a lawful inventory and therefore is an unlawful search and seizure. For the State to use such evidence, it must be demonstrated that the evidence would inevitably be lawfully discovered.(06-05-2013)
State v. SaechaoSentencing: Consecutive minimum sentences are plain error which are properly remanded for resentencing if there is no indication that the trial court will necessarily keep intact the total aggregate sentence.(04-24-2013)
Malpass and MalpassFamily Law: 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.(02-13-2013)
Classen v. Arete NW, LLCCivil Procedure: A trial court's denial of leave to amend is reviewed for the improper exercise of discretion, which considers: 1) the nature of the proposed amendments and their relationship to the existing pleadings; 2) the prejudice, if any, to the opposing party; 3) the timing of the proposed amendments and related docketing concerns; and 4) the colorable merit of the proposed amendments.(12-19-2012)
State v. Espinoza-BarraganCriminal Procedure: Nervousness and driving a vehicle recently purchased with cash are not sufficient to give rise to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, which would justify the extension of a valid stop.(12-05-2012)
Truck Insurance Exchange v. FriendCivil Procedure: Summary judgment should not be granted where genuine issues of material fact have not been resolved.(11-15-2012)
Wright v. TurnerInsurance Law: A plaintiff who seeks insurance benefits claiming two accidents has the burden of presenting at least prima facie evidence of both accidents and that the two collisions had distinctly different causes; the second accident cannot be a proximate result of the first.(10-24-2012)
State v. FullerCriminal Procedure: In criminal charges that are tried as violations, the right to trial by jury and proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt are retained if there exist too many characteristics of a criminal prosecution to deny those rights.(09-26-2012)
State v. JacksonCriminal Law: A defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser-included offense when the requisite mental state is a disputed issue of fact that would allow the jury to find that all the elements of the greater offense have not been proven, but that all the elements of one or more of the lesser offenses have been proven.(08-29-2012)
State v. ColonEvidence: The credibility of a witness may be impeached or bolstered in the form of reputation or opinion testimony regarding truthfulness of character if a foundation is established showing the witness has adequate contacts with the person to form a current personal opinion of the person regarding their truthfulness.(08-15-2012)
Dept. of Human Services v. J.G.Evidence: Because Oregon courts recognize the parent-stepchild relationship, out-of-court statements that are adverse to the stepchild's interests in maintaining a relationship with the step-parent are nonhearsay admissions of a party-opponent and therefore admissible.(08-01-2012)
State v. HauskinsAppellate Procedure: Under ORS 136.425, a confession without corroboration is insufficient to warrant a conviction. Secondly, the imposition of a punitive sanction for contempt is analogous enough to a criminal conviction that it carries a similar collateral consequence of stigma that will not be rendered moot because the sentenced incarceration was completed.(07-05-2012)
Nickerson v. Employment Dept.Employment Law: Unemployment benefits eligibility under ORS 657.221 are determined at the time of the claim based on whether a "reasonable assurance" of employment exists. Gaining reasonable assurance of employment after being eligible cannot retroactively defeat unemployment benefits eligibility.(06-06-2012)
State v. DelaportillaCriminal Law: A court cannot convict on a charge for which the defendant was not indicted unless the conviction is for an offense that is a lesser-included offense within the offense charged in the indictment.(05-16-2012)
State v. Kurokawa-LasciakCriminal Procedure: Authority to consent to a search is proper only if the consenter has proper authority to control and access the property to be searched.(04-25-2012)
State v. GroomCriminal Procedure: The automobile exception rule for searches applies only when the vehicle is moving when police first encounter it in connection with a crime.(03-28-2012)