Willamette Law Online

(37 summaries)

Gabriel Walsh

Oregon Supreme Court

TitleExcerptFilling Date
Dixon v. RosenblumBallot Titles: Under ORS 250.085, the Court reviews ballot petitions for accuracy. Ballot titles found to be inaccurate are referred to the Attorney General for modification. (05-08-2014)

Oregon Court of Appeals

TitleExcerptFilling Date
DeHarpport v. W.E.J.Civil Procedure: Under ORS 124.005 et seq., whether a defendant had probable cause to initiate a proceeding is a question for a court only if the facts are undisputed.(05-06-2015)
Hicks v. Central Point School DistrictMunicipal Law: Under ORS 279B.033, the required estimate of a potential contractor’s personnel costs is mandatory.(04-22-2015)
State v. PergandeCriminal Procedure: It is plain error for a trial court not to strike testimony of a witness that is an explicit comment on the credibility of another witness.(04-08-2015)
Stave v. BaileyEvidence: When a victim satisfies the first condition under OEC 803(18a)(b) – testifying and being subject to cross-examination – whether she was “unavailable” is irrelevant to admissibility of her out-of-court statements. (04-01-2015)
State v. RitzCriminal Procedure: To justify a warrantless entry into a residence under the doctrine of exigent circumstances, the state has the burden to prove that the time it would have taken to obtain a warrant would have sacrificed evidence. (03-25-2015)
State v. StoneCriminal Procedure: The fact that police question a person as a suspect in a crime does not inherently create a compelling setting for Oregon constitutional purposes. (03-18-2015)
Sundermier v. StateRemedies: ORS 238.364 provides a remedy meant to approximate a rebate of income tax paid, and not a windfall in excess of what a member would have received if the benefit had been tax exempt. (03-11-2015)
Dept. of Human Services v. T.L. Civil Procedure: To preserve a claim of inadequate assistance of appointed trial counsel, a parent in a dependency proceeding must first seek to resolve that issue in the juvenile court by moving, under ORS 410B.923(1), for the court to modify or set aside the judgment or order related to the claim. (03-04-2015)
Htaike v. SeinCivil Procedure: If there is no statutory basis to bring an action to recover usurious interests paid, equitable relief may be available. (02-25-2015)
State v. TeglandCriminal Procedure: Where erecting a structure in a public space is illegal and the person has been so informed and told that the structure must be removed, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy associated with the space. (02-11-2015)
State v. ReedEvidence: The proponent of scientific evidence must demonstrate that the proposed evidence is based on scientifically valid principles and that it is pertinent to the issue to which it is directed(02-04-2015)
State v. SlattonCriminal Law: ORS 164.055(1)(a) and (d) are not separate statutory provisions for the purposes of merging convictions. (01-22-2015)
Dept. of Human Services v. A.F.Juvenile Law: In a juvenile court jurisdictional hearing, the conditions and circumstances that give rise to jurisdiction over the children must exist at the time of the hearing. (12-31-2014)
Scott v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp.Administrative Law: An authorization of temporary disability benefits is legally sufficient under ORS 656.262(4) when an objectively reasonable insurer would understand contemporaneous medical reports to signify approval excusing the worker from work. (12-31-2014)
STATE v. LILECriminal Procedure: The right to counsel under Article 1, section 11 of the Oregon Constitution includes the right to privacy when communicating with an attorney through the attorney’s representative. (12-24-2014)
State v. HarrisonAppellate Procedure: When a claimed “plain error” is associated with a trial court not having sua sponte interrupted a line of questioning, the existence of any error does not depend solely on whether the lawyer’s questions or the elicited answers would have been inadmissible if they had been objected to.(12-17-2014)
Goodwin v. Kingsmen Plastering, Inc.Civil Procedure: For injury to an interest in real property, the six-year statute of limitations in ORS 12.080(3) governs, and accrues upon the discovery of a claim.(12-10-2014)
Nay v. Dept. of Human ServicesAdministrative Law: Amended provisions OAR 461-135-0835(1)(e)(B)(iii) and OAR 461-135-0832(10)(b)(B)(viii) are invalid because they exceed the statutory authority granted by ORS 416.350 and 42 USC sec. 1396p.(11-26-2014)
Clatsop County District Attorney v. City of AstoriaCriminal Procedure: A city attorney has all the powers of a district attorney with respect to a violation of any offense created by statute that is subject to the jurisdiction of a municipal court and committed or triable in that city.(11-13-2014)
State v. ThomasCriminal Procedure: For a trial court to properly exercise its discretion to deny a motion for continuance, it must inquire into the nature, and evaluate the merits, of a defendant’s complaints.(10-29-2014)
State v. PhillipsCriminal Procedure: A notice of the introduction into evidence of hearsay statements under OEC 803(18a)(b) need not set out verbatim the statements that the State intends to offer.(10-15-2014)
State v. CanfieldCriminal Procedure: When a police officer requests identification from a person, the request alone, without more, does not constitute a stop for purposes of Article I, section 9 of the Oregon Constitution.(10-08-2014)
State v. NewcomerCriminal Law: To prove that a defendant knowingly failed to appear on a criminal citation, ORS 133.076, the state has the burden of proof to prove that the defendant knew of his or her obligation to appear.(10-01-2014)
State ex rel Simons v. SimonsFamily Law: In determining whether a defense of nonparentage may be raised, the law that governs is the law of the state where parentage is asserted to have been previously determined.(09-17-2014)
State v. StricklandCriminal Procedure: A waiver of the right against self-incrimination applies to a defendant’s submission of an affidavit at a motion hearing.(09-10-2014)
State v. HallCriminal Procedure: Under former ORS 135.747 and in cases where that statute still governs, a court must determine whether a delay in a trial was acceptable by determining the extent to which the delay was justified.(09-04-2014)
State v. WabingaCriminal Procedure: Reasonable suspicion does not require that the facts observed by the officer indicate illegal activity, but only that those facts support a reasonable inference of illegal activity. (08-20-2014)
State v. SymonsDisability Law: Under ORS 125.025(1), a court having jurisdiction over a protective proceeding has broad authority to protect the welfare of protected persons, even over the statutory obligations of the LTCO.(08-13-2014)
State v. HockersmithCriminal Procedure: Under Article I, section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, a warrantless inventory search of a vehicle incident to a lawful impounding is not permitted, unless the search is conducted pursuant to a properly authorized administrative program.(08-06-2014)
State v. GravesAppellate Procedure: To preserve an error for appeal, a party must provide the trial court with an argument that is specific enough to ensure that the court can identify its alleged error with enough clarity to consider and correct it immediately, if correction is warranted. (07-23-2014)
State v. MendozaCriminal Procedure: Under Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution, a person’s refusal to consent to something that he or she is not required to do is not admissible at trial. (07-09-2014)
State v. FletcherCriminal Procedure: An issue can be preserved for appeal when the party asserting error had requested that the jury hear his argument, but was prevented by the trial court from advancing that argument.(06-18-2014)
Chernaik v. KitzhaberCivil Procedure: Under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, a complaint can be justiciable when it seeks a judicially issued declaration regarding duties that the state may have under a legal doctrine.(06-11-2014)
State v. GardnerCriminal Procedure: Even if a search violates Article I, section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, because it resulted in constitutionally tainted information being included in a warrant application, it does not compel the conclusion that a search conducted pursuant to that warrant was invalid.(05-29-2014)
State v. Miller Criminal Procedure: Although ORS 137.540(2) allows a court to impose special provisions of probation when reasonably related to the crime of conviction or the needs of the petitioner for the protection of the public or reformation of the probationer, no provision exists for the forfeiture of property as a condition of probation.(04-30-2014)
State v. PearsonCriminal Procedure: Under Article I, section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, which governs privacy rights with respect to personal effects, an officer unlawfully extends a traffic stop if he inquires about the presence of a weapon once the officer’s source of suspicion has been dispelled.(04-23-2014)