Mccormick v. State, 431 P.3d 89 (Or. 2018). · Go Syfert
Search
Mccormick v. State, 431 P.3d 89 (Or. 2018). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, 2019–2020 · …because it is error to dismiss a claim for declaratory relief unless there is no justiciable controversy, we remand for the issuance of a judgment that declares the rights of the parties. ⚠ not in text Topic ↗
16 citation events (16 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Tran v. Clear Recon Corp.
Or. Ct. App. · 2020 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
because it is error to dismiss a claim for declaratory relief unless there is no justiciable controversy, we remand for the issuance of a judgment that declares the rights of the parties.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Couey v. Clarno
Or. Ct. App. · 2020 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
because it is error to dismiss a claim for declaratory relief unless there is no justiciable controversy, we remand for the issuance of a judgment that declares the rights of the parties.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) W. Radio Servs. Co. v. Verizon Wireless (Vaw), LLC
Or. Ct. App. · 2019 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
because it is error to dismiss a claim for declaratory relief unless there is no justiciable controversy, we remand for the issuance of a judgment that declares the rights of the parties.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Allen
Or. Ct. App. · 2024 · signal: see also · confidence low
If the statement is offered for another purpose, such “as context for the responses that those statements elicited from [the] defendant,” then the statement does not consti- tute vouching and is not “categorically inadmissible.” Id. at 334-35 ; see also State v. Peterson, 291 Or App 573, 578 , 422 P3d 421 , rev den, 363 Or 815 (2018) (holding that the trial court did not plainly err by failing to, sua sponte, strike an out-of-court statement, because the statement “provided relevant context for the victim’s emotional reaction to the question of why it took her so long to report the…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MCCORMICK
v.
STATE of Oregon, BY AND THROUGH the OREGON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
A159931(S066206).
Oregon Supreme Court.
Nov 8, 2018.
431 P.3d 89
Published
1 passages pin-cited by 3 cases
Pinpoint authority: bottom 90%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of Oregon (3)

Review Allowed.