January 0 summaries
February 3 summaries
Eddy v. Anderson
鈥'[I]f the landlord neither knew nor reasonably should have known of the condition that constituted noncompliance,鈥 and the 'tenant knew or reasonably should have known of the condition and failed to give actual notice to the landlord in a reasonable time prior鈥 to the damage, the tenant is not 'entitled to recover damages鈥 for the landlord鈥檚 noncompliance with the habitability requirements.鈥 ORS 90.360(2). ORS 90.370(1)(a) requires a tenant to 鈥減rove that[,] prior to the filing of the landlord鈥檚 action[,] the landlord reasonably had or should have had knowledge or had received actual notice of the facts that constitute the tenant鈥檚 counterclaim.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Landlord Tenant
Martinez v. Cain
鈥淲hen the same conduct or criminal episode violates two or more statutory provisions and each provision requires proof of an element that the others do not, there are as many separately punishable offenses as there are separate statutory violations.鈥 ORS 161.067(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Iseli
Under OEC 804(1)(e), a witness is unavailable in situations where the declarant "is absent from the hearing and the proponent of the declarant's statement has been unable to procure the declarant's attendance by process or other reasonable means."
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
March 0 summaries
April 4 summaries
Citizens for Resp. Devel. in The Dalles v. Walmart
Under Morse v. Oregon Division of State Lands, 285 Or 197, 204 (1979), while issuing a permit pursuant ORS 搂 196.825, 鈥減ublic need鈥 for the proposed project only needs to be weighed when the project 鈥渦nreasonably interferes with the paramount policy of the state,鈥 however, the 鈥渦nreasonably interferes鈥 standard always applies.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Pike v. Cain
鈥淸T]he issue was the constitutional adequacy of counsel鈥檚 investigation to support his strategy choice at the petitioner鈥檚 sentencing, at which the state would urge the court to sentence the petitioner as a dangerous offender.鈥 See Richardson v. Belleque, 362 Or 236, 258 (2017).
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Linn County v. Brown
Under Article XI, section 15(2)(c), of the Oregon Constitution, a 鈥減rogram鈥 is 鈥渟pecific 鈥榮ervices鈥 that a 鈥榣ocal government鈥 is to 鈥榩erform鈥 for 鈥榩ersons, government agencies or the public generally鈥欌 and does not include a statutory policy enacted by the legislature.
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Multnomah County v. Mehrwein
Under Article 1, section 8 of the Oregon Constitution, laws restricting speech are facially unconstitutional only if "written in terms directed at the substance of [speech]" unless "within some historical exception." State v. Robertson, 293 Or 402, 412 (1982).
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
May 2 summaries
State v. Haji
Under Article VII (Amended), section 5(6), 鈥淭he district attorney may file an amended indictment or information whenever, by ruling of the court, an indictment or information is held to be defective in form.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
In Re Harris
The exception to the rule against the unauthorized practice of law provided under RPC 5.5(c) applies to an out-of-state lawyer in good standing who is awaiting reciprocal admission to the Oregon State Bar and meets at least one of the criteria set out in RPC 5.5(c)(1) to (5), even if he has accepted permanent employment in Oregon.
Area(s) of Law:- Professional Responsibility
June 1 summary
Elkhorn Baptist Church v. Brown
Under ORS 401.192(4), the 鈥減owers granted to the Governor鈥 under a state of emergency declared under 401.165 continue until the 鈥渢ermination of the state of emergency鈥 either by the Governor or by a joint resolution of the state legislature. Under ORS 433.441(4), the Governor鈥檚 powers related to a public health emergency are not subject to the twenty-eight-day limit, if a state of emergency under ORS 401.165 is declared.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
July 6 summaries
Buel/Markley v. Rosenblum
In reviewing a ballot title, the court determines if the ballot title provided a concise and impartial statement of the purpose of the measure. Priestly v. Paulus, 297 Or. 141, 145 (1979). A court will not modify an explanatory statement unless the insufficiency extends beyond reasonable argument. Sizemore v. Myers, 327 Or. 456, 467 (1998).
Area(s) of Law:- Ballot Titles
Pulito v. Oregon State Board of Nursing
Where there is no statutory definition 鈥淸the Court will] ordinarily look to the plain meaning of the statute鈥檚 text as a key first step in determining what particular terms mean.鈥 Comcast Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 356 Or 282, 295, 337 P3d 768 (2014).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Busch v. McInnis Waste Systems, Inc.
The legislature must act in a sufficient reason to counterbalance Art. 1, 搂 10鈥檚 substantive right that a person injured has a right to remedy those injuries. Horton v. OHSU, 359 Or. 168, 376 P.3d 998 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Remedies
Arvidson v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp.
鈥淭o constitute a finding that the compensation awarded to the Claimant should not be disallowed or reduced for purposes of [ORS 656.382(2)], such a finding must be made on the merits of the claim.鈥 Timothy L. Williams, 46 Van Natta 2274 (1994)
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
State v. Bolton
ORS 137.101 operates to distribute damages to victims of a crime but permits the sentencing court to redirect money from penalty fines and the sentencing court鈥檚 authority 鈥渘eed not be calibrated to鈥攐r limited to鈥攖he economic damages sustained by the victim.鈥 State v. Garlitz, 287 Or App 372, 377 (2017).
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
In Re Long
The Rules of Professional Conduct allow for alternative fee agreements that include an 鈥渆arned on receipt鈥 clause, however, the agreement must also stipulate that 鈥渢he client may discharge the lawyer at any time and in that event may be entitled to a refund of all or part of the fee if the services for which the fee was paid are not completed.鈥澨 RPC 1.5(c)(3).听
Area(s) of Law:- Professional Responsibility
August 3 summaries
James v. State of Oregon
The contract rights of a member of the Public Employees Retirement System are impaired if: (1) an amendment functions retrospectively to decrease benefits attributable to work completed prior to the change, or (2) an amendment prospectively operates to reduce future benefits and the prior offer was irrevocable. Moro v. State of Oregon, 357 Or 167, 202-207, 351 P3d 1 (2015).
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
State v. Haltom
Mental state definitions applicable to conduct don鈥檛 just apply to particular body movements, they apply more broadly to additional elements of that nature 鈥 such as the essential character 鈥 of a prohibited act. State v. Simonov, 358 Or. 531, 540-41 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Summerfield v. Oregon Liquor Control Comission
鈥(1) A worker who has sustained a compensable injury and is disabled from performing the duties of the worker鈥檚 former regular employment shall, upon demand, be reemployed by the worker鈥檚 employer at employment which is available and suitable." ORS 659A.046. 鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Employment Law
September 4 summaries
State v. Weaver
鈥淸T]hreats against witnesses are intolerable. Substantial government interference with a defense witness鈥 free and unhampered choice to testify violates due process rights of the defendant.鈥 United States v. Goodwin, 625 F2d 693, 703 (5th Cir 1980).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
City of Damascus v. State of Oregon
ORS 221.610 and ORS 221.621 set out the requirements for elections. Additionally, a legislature may pass a retroactive law unless it impairs a right of contract or vested right, and home rule provisions provide that cities may supply the manner of utilizing the initiative and referendum powers as to their municipal legislation.
Area(s) of Law:- Municipal Law
Rundgren v. Hood River County
The legislature's intent under ORS 92.170(1)(d) is for the eligibility of correction to be determined by whether a licensed surveyor could ascertain of an error.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
State ex rel Rosenblum v. Nisley
Under ORS 236.010 (1)(g), an office becomes vacant if the 鈥渋ncumbent ceases to possess any other qualification required for election or appointment to such office.鈥 Under ORS 8.630, a district attorney must be admitted to practice law in Oregon.
Area(s) of Law:- Election Law
October 1 summary
Chernaik v. Brown
The public trust doctrine, a common law doctrine, applies to 鈥渘avigable waterways鈥 and the lands below such waterways, capable of expanding to include natural resources.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
November 1 summary
State v. Morales
鈥淸F]unds paid by and belonging to a third party cannot be the sole basis for a finding that a defendant has the 'ability to pay' court-ordered costs鈥 because the trial court must still go through an inquiry to see if the defendant has the ability to pay fees or costs under ORS 161.665.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
December 2 summaries
Friends of Columbia Gorge v. Energy Fac. Siting Coun.
Under ORS 183.497(1)(a), 鈥渢he court may鈥llow a petitioner reasonable attorney鈥檚 fees and costs if the court finds in favor of the petitioner.鈥 Under ORS 20.075(1)-(2), 鈥渨hat counts as 鈥榬easonable attorney fees' is an exercise of judicial discretion based on the statutory factors鈥 that are listed.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
State v. Ciraulo
鈥淸I]nstructing the jury that it could return a non-unanimous guilty verdict [is] not structural error [w]here a jury poll reveals that the jury unanimously found the defendant guilty of the charged offense[s], the nonunanimous jury instruction [can] be held harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.鈥 State v. Flores Ramos, 367 Or 292, 319-20 (2020).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law