Articles Tagged with Oregon Supreme Court

Published on:

By

Lawyers in large law firms usually have databases, couriers, professional law librarians and money to help them locate full-text copies of court documents quickly. What are mere mortals to do? There is actually quite a bit.

Mere mortals who want Oregon appellate court documents have their own “points of access” and it’s going to get better:

1) How to Find Oregon Appellate Court Briefs research guide, which will be updated shortly

Published on:

By

The Oregonian has posted the Oregon  Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability report to the Oregon Supreme Court on Marion County Circuit Court Judge Vance Day.

You can find the report’s link at their 1/25/16 article:

“Judge Vance Day should be ousted from job, in part for refusing to marry gays, commission says,” by Aimee Green, Oregonian, January 25, 2016.

Published on:

By

Moro v. State of Oregon, 357 Or 167 (S061452) (2015)

“.... Before Balmer, Chief Justice, and Kistler, Walters, Linder, Brewer, and Baldwin, Justices, and Haselton, Chief Judge of the Oregon Court of Appeals, Justice pro tempore.**

BALMER, C. J.

Published on:

By

Antonio Cortez v. Nacco Material Handling Group, Inc.et al (TC 0503-02632) (CA A144045) (SC S060604)

“On review from the Court of Appeals in an appeal from the Multnomah County Circuit Court, Michael H. Marcus, Judge. 248 Or App 435, 274 P3d 202 (2012). The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. Opinion of the Court by Justice Rives Kistler.

Today, the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that neither the limited liability provision in the statutes governing limited liability companies (LCCs) nor the exclusive-remedy clause in the workers’ compensation statutes barred plaintiff’s claims for negligence and violations of the Employer Liability Law (ELL) against the member-manager of the LLC where he worked. The Court also ruled that, although plaintiff had not presented sufficient evidence to show that the member-manager could be held liable for negligence, he had presented enough evidence from which a reasonable juror could find that the member-manager was liable under the ELL….” [Link to full case and Oregon Supreme Court 2014 opinions.]

Published on:

By

Ronald Doyle et al. v. City of Medford et al., (TC 0801317) (CA A147497) (SC S061463)

On review from the Court of Appeals in an appeal from the Jackson County Circuit Court, Mark S. Schiveley, Judge. 256 Or App 625, 303 P3d 346 (2013). The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The case is remanded to that court for further proceedings. Opinion of the Court by Justice David V. Brewer. Justice Martha L. Walters concurred and filed an opinion, in which Justice Richard C. Baldwin joined.

Today, the Oregon Supreme Court held that, in enacting ORS 243.303(2), which requires local governments to make available to retired employees, “insofar as and to the extent possible,” the health care insurance coverage available to current officers and employees of the local government, the legislature did not expressly or impliedly intend to create a private right of action for the enforcement of that duty. The Court also declined to exercise its common-law authority to provide such a right of action sounding in tort….” [Link to full case, Opinions Issued in 2014, and the October 2, 2014, Supreme Court Opinions Media Release.]

Published on:

By

Lawyers know this, but not all self-represented litigants do: you have to know your Court Rules, in cycle adoptions and out of cycle amendments.

For example:  Chief Justice Balmer and Chief Judge Haselton recently signed orders adopting temporary amendments to the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure (ORAP):

These are new rules regarding PDF-Archival (PDF-A) documents, documents filed under seal, filing deadlines, embedded audio or video files, and much more. See these Chief Justice Orders:

Published on:

By

On January 7, 2014, the Supreme Court:

“1. Allowed petitions for review in:

Myles A. Bagley v. Mt. Bachelor, Inc. (S061821) (A148231) (appeal from Dechutes County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 258 Or App 390, 310 P3d 692 (2013)).

Published on:

By

[Link to Vanorum I.]

See Justice Landau’s concurring opinion in State of Oregon v. Ian George Vanornum (SC S060715), decided December 27, 2013 (on page PDF page 24 or Opinion page 23 or Concurring page 1)

Excerpt:

Published on:

By

State of Oregon v. Ian George Vanornum (SC S060715), decided December 27, 2013:

Excerpt, p. 7: “.... The initial question that this case raises — whether ORCP 59 H controls appellate court review of claims of instructional error — arises because subsection (1) declares that “a party may not obtain review on appeal” of a trial court’s asserted error in giving or refusing to give a jury instruction unless the party identified the asserted error to the trial court and made a timely notation of exception….” [Link to full opinion.]

Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure (ORCP)