Read the Guest Opinion “Oregon Supreme Court protects tenants from landlord retaliation,” by Tracy White, attorney, in the Hillsboro Argus, August 14, 2013.
On December 9, 2010, the Oregon Supreme Court decided:
Barbara L. Hopkins v. SAIF Corp., et al., (WCB 0407794) (CA A138825) (SC S058081)
“… On review from the Court of Appeals in a judicial review from an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board. Hopkins v. SAIF, 232 Or App 439, 222 P3d 1140 (2009)….
Dewsnup v. Farmers Insurance Company of Oregon, (SC 057895), decided September 16, 2010:
“…Today, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled that, based on plaintiffs’ expert’s affidavit, the question whether a roof, after a homeowner has begun to disassemble and repair it, remained a “roof” for the purposes of a homeowners’ insurance policy, was a question of fact that must be decided by a jury rather than being determined by a judge on summary judgment….” (Read full 9/16/10, Media Release or full opinion.)
The Sentencing Law and Policy blog, posts this: “Oregon Supreme Court applies Apprendi to consecutive sentences”. Read the Comments too.
Excerpt from the blog post:
“Providing a great reminder that there are still many unsettled Blakely issues, the Oregon Supreme Court today in State v. Ice, No. S52248 (Ore. Oct. 11, 2007) (available here), holds that the “federal constitution requires that a jury, rather than a judge, find the facts that Oregon law requires be present before a judge can impose consecutive sentences.” All Blakely fans should make the time to check out Ice….”