absence of any claim in Oregon

2022Those absent elements—and particularly the absence of any requirement that violence be imminent—led the court to conclude that the law was facially unconstitutional: a harassment statute that contained no requirement that violence is imminent “sweeps too much protected speech within its reach to survive a facial challenge.” Id. at 196 .

2021Beam Distilling Co. and Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 US 263 , 104 S Ct 3049 , 82 L Ed 2d 200 (1984): “When this Court does not ‘reserve the question whether its holding should be applied to the parties before it,’ however, an opinion announcing a rule of federal law ‘is properly understood to have followed the normal rule of ret- roactive application’ and must be ‘read to hold . . . that its rule should apply retroactively to the litigants then before the Court.’ ” Harper, 509 US at 97 -98 (quoting Beam, 501 US at 539 ) (ellipsis in original; emphasis added).

2021Beam Distilling Co. and Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 US 263 , 104 S Ct 3049 , 82 L Ed 2d 200 (1984): “When this Court does not ‘reserve the question whether its holding should be applied to the parties before it,’ however, an opinion announcing a rule of federal law ‘is properly understood to have followed the normal rule of ret- roactive application’ and must be ‘read to hold . . . that its rule should apply retroactively to the litigants then before the Court.’ ” Harper, 509 US at 97 -98 (quoting Beam, 501 US at 539 ) (ellipsis in original; emphasis added).

2021Beam Distilling Co. and Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 US 263 , 104 S Ct 3049 , 82 L Ed 2d 200 (1984): “When this Court does not ‘reserve the question whether its holding should be applied to the parties before it,’ however, an opinion announcing a rule of federal law ‘is properly understood to have followed the normal rule of ret- roactive application’ and must be ‘read to hold . . . that its rule should apply retroactively to the litigants then before the Court.’ ” Harper, 509 US at 97 -98 (quoting Beam, 501 US at 539 ) (ellipsis in original; emphasis added).

2021Beam Distilling Co. and Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 US 263 , 104 S Ct 3049 , 82 L Ed 2d 200 (1984): “When this Court does not ‘reserve the question whether its holding should be applied to the parties before it,’ however, an opinion announcing a rule of federal law ‘is properly understood to have followed the normal rule of ret- roactive application’ and must be ‘read to hold . . . that its rule should apply retroactively to the litigants then before the Court.’ ” Harper, 509 US at 97 -98 (quoting Beam, 501 US at 539 ) (ellipsis in original; emphasis added).

2011The statute requires only that the state prove that a defendant had the status while driving, not that the defendant knew or should have known of it.” Miller, 309 Or at 369 .

2010As we stated over 35 years ago in American Can Co. v. OLCC, 15 Or App 618, 644 , 517 P2d 691 (1973), a majority of the United States Supreme Court has not invalidated economic legislation on the basis of a substantive due process challenge — whether that challenge be “facial” or “as-applied” — since the Depression. 9 In the absence of any violation of federal law, the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees under 42 USC section 1988 for causing plaintiff to be subjected to the deprivation of rights secured by the constitution. 10 Plaintiff also cross-appeals on the ground that the court er

2010As we stated over 35 years ago in American Can Co. v. OLCC, 15 Or App 618, 644 , 517 P2d 691 (1973), a majority of the United States Supreme Court has not invalidated economic legislation on the basis of a substantive due process challenge — whether that challenge be “facial” or “as-applied” — since the Depression. 9 In the absence of any violation of federal law, the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees under 42 USC section 1988 for causing plaintiff to be subjected to the deprivation of rights secured by the constitution. 10 Plaintiff also cross-appeals on the ground that the court er

2006Under our decisions in State v. Gornick, 196 Or App 397 , 102 P3d 734 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 583 (2005), and State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364 , 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), in the absence of any waiver by defendant of his jury trial right, imposition of the sentence was plain error.

2006Under our decisions in State v. Gornick, 196 Or App 397 , 102 P3d 734 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 583 (2005), and State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364 , 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), in the absence of any waiver by defendant of his jury trial right, imposition of the sentence was plain error.

2006Under our decisions in State v. Gornick, 196 Or App 397 , 102 P3d 734 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 583 (2005), and State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364 , 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), in the absence of any waiver by defendant of his jury trial right, imposition of the sentence was plain error.

2006Under our decisions in State v. Gornick, 196 Or App 397 , 102 P3d 734 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 583 (2005), and State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364 , 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), in the absence of any waiver by defendant of his jury trial right, imposition of the sentence was plain error.

2006Under our decisions in State v. Gornick, 196 Or App 397 , 102 P3d 734 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 583 (2005), and State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364 , 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), in the absence of any waiver by defendant of his jury trial right, imposition of the sentence was plain error.

2005Where there is a clearly defined and well-settled applicable rule of law, the courts are bound to enforce the rule, and discretion is at an end.’ ” Kuhnhausen, 201 Or at 565 (Tooze, J., dissenting) (quoting Lewis, 113 Or at 364 ) (emphasis omitted).

2000In Jackson v. Stearns, 48 Or 25 , 84 P 798 , 5 Lns 390 (1906), the court held that an attorney could not maintain a separate suit to enjoin a settlement between his client and the defendant in a law suit commenced by the client.

2000In Jackson v. Stearns, 48 Or 25 , 84 P 798 , 5 Lns 390 (1906), the court held that an attorney could not maintain a separate suit to enjoin a settlement between his client and the defendant in a law suit commenced by the client.

1991See State v. Montgomery, 106 Or App 150, 152 , 806 P2d 183 (1991); State v. Braughton, 28 Or App 891, 893 , 561 P2d 1040 (1977); ORAP 5.45(2).

1991See State v. Montgomery, 106 Or App 150, 152 , 806 P2d 183 (1991); State v. Braughton, 28 Or App 891, 893 , 561 P2d 1040 (1977); ORAP 5.45(2).

1979In the absence of any inquiry, Publishers is charged "with knowledge of all facts that [it] might have learned had such diligence been exercised,” Murray v. Wiley, 169 Or at 407 .

1978NOTES [1] In Latham and Latham, 274 Or. 421 , 547 P.2d 144 (1976), we held that an express agreement between two unmarried parties to share equally in real and personal property accumulated during the period they were living together as husband and wife was not void as against public policy. [2] We are compelled to recognize the fact that the number of parties participating in such relationships has increased greatly.

1978NOTES [1] In Latham and Latham, 274 Or. 421 , 547 P.2d 144 (1976), we held that an express agreement between two unmarried parties to share equally in real and personal property accumulated during the period they were living together as husband and wife was not void as against public policy. [2] We are compelled to recognize the fact that the number of parties participating in such relationships has increased greatly.

1911Hayes v. Clifford, 42 Or. 568 ( 72 Pac. 1 ).

1911Hayes v. Clifford, 42 Or. 568 ( 72 Pac. 1 ).

1899In Newby v. Myers, 44 Kan. 477 ( 24 Pac. 971 ), it is held that the findings of fact of a trial court must be based upon the issues made by the pleadings, and any finding outside such issues is a nullity.

1896“No case,” says Sherwood, J., in Bushong v. Taylor, 82 Mo. 660 , “appears to have been found ,where the point of the power of trustees to charge the church property has been directly passed upon; but several instances have occurred where such powers have passed unchallenged, and formed the basis of judgments in courts of last resort.” Further in the opinion the same learned justice says: “And, looking to the character of the organization and nature of the government of the Methodist Episcopal Church, it would seem clear that the trustees are the agents of the aggregate body of members, at leas