Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 2023–2026 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oregon courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Murrellgreen2 sentences2025See State v. Johnson, 339 Or 69, 86 , 116 P3d 879 (2005) (“[I]t is clear that, when [‘good cause’] appear[s] in a statutory context, [it is] focused on real, albeit sometimes difficult to discern, legal standards: the legislature’s view of what is ‘good[.]’ * * * As such, in the absence of a factual dis- pute, a determination that ‘good cause’ not to dismiss has been shown * * * invokes an objective standard and must be reviewed for legal error.” (Emphasis in original.)); see also State v. Murrell, 242 Or App 178 , 182 n 1, 255 P3d 574 (2011) (declining the state’s invitation to hold that an a 2025See State v. Johnson, 339 Or 69, 86 , 116 P3d 879 (2005) (“[I]t is clear that, when [‘good cause’] appear[s] in a statutory context, [it is] focused on real, albeit sometimes difficult to discern, legal standards: the legislature’s view of what is ‘good[.]’ * * * As such, in the absence of a factual dis- pute, a determination that ‘good cause’ not to dismiss has been shown * * * invokes an objective standard and must be reviewed for legal error.” (Emphasis in original.)); see also State v. Murrell, 242 Or App 178 , 182 n 1, 255 P3d 574 (2011) (declining the state’s invitation to hold that an a | 2 | 2 |
State v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2025See State v. Johnson, 339 Or 69, 86 , 116 P3d 879 (2005) (“[I]t is clear that, when [‘good cause’] appear[s] in a statutory context, [it is] focused on real, albeit sometimes difficult to discern, legal standards: the legislature’s view of what is ‘good[.]’ * * * As such, in the absence of a factual dis- pute, a determination that ‘good cause’ not to dismiss has been shown * * * invokes an objective standard and must be reviewed for legal error.” (Emphasis in original.)); see also State v. Murrell, 242 Or App 178 , 182 n 1, 255 P3d 574 (2011) (declining the state’s invitation to hold that an a 2025See State v. Johnson, 339 Or 69, 86 , 116 P3d 879 (2005) (“[I]t is clear that, when [‘good cause’] appear[s] in a statutory context, [it is] focused on real, albeit sometimes difficult to discern, legal standards: the legislature’s view of what is ‘good[.]’ * * * As such, in the absence of a factual dis- pute, a determination that ‘good cause’ not to dismiss has been shown * * * invokes an objective standard and must be reviewed for legal error.” (Emphasis in original.)); see also State v. Murrell, 242 Or App 178 , 182 n 1, 255 P3d 574 (2011) (declining the state’s invitation to hold that an a | 2 | 2 |
State v. Sewellgreen2 sentences2023See, e.g., State v. Sewell, 257 Or App 462, 468-69 , 307 P3d 464 , rev den, 354 Or 389 (2013) (describing the abuse of dis- cretion standard of review as it applies to OEC 403). 2023See, e.g., State v. Sewell, 257 Or App 462, 468-69 , 307 P3d 464 , rev den, 354 Or 389 (2013) (describing the abuse of dis- cretion standard of review as it applies to OEC 403). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ramoz
green
1 sentence2026State v. Ramoz, 367 Or 670, 703 , 483 P3d 670 (2021) (“We apply an abuse of dis- cretion standard when application of the appropriate legal principles would permit more than one legally correct out- come.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.)). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.