importance rule (Oregon) · Go Syfert
← Oregon issues

importance rule in Oregon

14 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 1912–2026 2 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.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Salas-Juarezgreen
orctapp · 2014 · cited in 2 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2014–2023
2 sentences

2023See State v. Salas-Juarez, 264 Or App 57, 63 , 329 P3d 805 , rev den, 356 Or 575 (2014) (recognizing that the Oregon Supreme Court has “amplified” the importance of the rule prohibiting vouching).

2023See State v. Salas-Juarez, 264 Or App 57, 63 , 329 P3d 805 , rev den, 356 Or 575 (2014) (recognizing that the Oregon Supreme Court has “amplified” the importance of the rule prohibiting vouching).

12
State v. Davisgreen
orctapp · 2017 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018See Davis , 286 Or.App. at 536 , 400 P.3d 994 (distinguishing McHaffie largely on that point); Sherman , 274 Or.App. at 776 , 362 P.3d 720 (similar).

2018See Davis , 286 Or.App. at 536 , 400 P.3d 994 (distinguishing McHaffie largely on that point); Sherman , 274 Or.App. at 776 , 362 P.3d 720 (similar).

11
State v. Lowellgreen
orctapp · 2012 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014Application of the rule is “straightforward” when “one witness states directly that he or she believes another witness, or that the other witness is honest or truthful.” Lupoli, 348 Or at 357 ; see State v. Lowell, 249 Or App 364, 366-68 , 277 P3d 588 , rev den, 352 Or 378 (2012) (admission of detective’s testimony that he “didn’t think that [the defendant] was being very honest” during his interview was plain error).

2014Application of the rule is “straightforward” when “one witness states directly that he or she believes another witness, or that the other witness is honest or truthful.” Lupoli, 348 Or at 357 ; see State v. Lowell, 249 Or App 364, 366-68 , 277 P3d 588 , rev den, 352 Or 378 (2012) (admission of detective’s testimony that he “didn’t think that [the defendant] was being very honest” during his interview was plain error).

11
Dean v. Exotic Veneers, Inc.green
or · 1975 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008See Dean v. Exotic Veneers, Inc., 271 Or 188, 193 , 531 P2d 266 (1975) (quoting Charles E.

2008See Dean v. Exotic Veneers, Inc., 271 Or 188, 193 , 531 P2d 266 (1975) (quoting Charles E.

11
Strunk v. Public Employees Retirement Boardgreen
or · 2005 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008See Strunk v. PERB, 338 Or 145, 189 , 108 P3d 1058 (2005) (where statute is subsequently amended, “[i]t is presumed that such changes in meaning do not go further than is expressly declared or necessarily implied”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 11 The importance of the requirement that courts not insert what has been omitted is particularly apparent where the proposed addition of language would raise due process concerns.

2008See Strunk v. PERB, 338 Or 145, 189 , 108 P3d 1058 (2005) (where statute is subsequently amended, “[i]t is presumed that such changes in meaning do not go further than is expressly declared or necessarily implied”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 11 The importance of the requirement that courts not insert what has been omitted is particularly apparent where the proposed addition of language would raise due process concerns.

11
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Fadeleygreen
or · 1990 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
2 sentences

1999See In re Fadeley, [ 310 Or 548, 563 , 802 P2d 31 (1990)] (‘The stake of the public in a judiciary that is both honest in fact and honest in appearance is profound.

1999See In re Fadeley, [ 310 Or 548, 563 , 802 P2d 31 (1990)] (‘The stake of the public in a judiciary that is both honest in fact and honest in appearance is profound.

11
Pottgen v. Missouri State High School Activities Associationgreen
ca8 · 1995 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999Activities Ass’n, 40 F3d 926, 930 (8th Cir 1994) (examining the importance of a requirement to the program in determining whether that requirement was an essential eligibility requirement of the program).

11
State v. Clarkgreen
or · 1981 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
1 sentence

1986State v. Clark, supra, 291 Or at 235.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

CaseCitedYears
Department of Human Services v. T. L. green
or · 2016
2 sentences

2026L.] , 358 Or 679 [, 688, 369 P3d 1159 (2016)].

2026L.] , 358 Or 679 [, 688, 369 P3d 1159 (2016)].

12026–2026
State v. Middleton green
or · 1983
2 sentences

2023“Because credibility determi- nations are the exclusive province of the jury, witnesses are categorically prohibited from expressing a view on whether another witness is ‘telling the truth.’ ” Davis v. Cain, 304 Or App 356, 363 , 467 P3d 816 (2020) (quoting State v. Middleton, 294 Or 427, 438 , 657 P2d 1215 (1983)).

2023“Because credibility determi- nations are the exclusive province of the jury, witnesses are categorically prohibited from expressing a view on whether another witness is ‘telling the truth.’ ” Davis v. Cain, 304 Or App 356, 363 , 467 P3d 816 (2020) (quoting State v. Middleton, 294 Or 427, 438 , 657 P2d 1215 (1983)).

12023–2023
Davis v. Cain green
orctapp · 2020
2 sentences

2023“Because credibility determi- nations are the exclusive province of the jury, witnesses are categorically prohibited from expressing a view on whether another witness is ‘telling the truth.’ ” Davis v. Cain, 304 Or App 356, 363 , 467 P3d 816 (2020) (quoting State v. Middleton, 294 Or 427, 438 , 657 P2d 1215 (1983)).

2023“Because credibility determi- nations are the exclusive province of the jury, witnesses are categorically prohibited from expressing a view on whether another witness is ‘telling the truth.’ ” Davis v. Cain, 304 Or App 356, 363 , 467 P3d 816 (2020) (quoting State v. Middleton, 294 Or 427, 438 , 657 P2d 1215 (1983)).

12023–2023
State v. Sherman green
orctapp · 2015
2 sentences

2018See Davis , 286 Or.App. at 536 , 400 P.3d 994 (distinguishing McHaffie largely on that point); Sherman , 274 Or.App. at 776 , 362 P.3d 720 (similar).

2018See Davis , 286 Or.App. at 536 , 400 P.3d 994 (distinguishing McHaffie largely on that point); Sherman , 274 Or.App. at 776 , 362 P.3d 720 (similar).

12018–2018
State v. Milbradt green
or · 1988
1 sentence

2014The Supreme Court amplified the importance of that rule when it stated, “We have said before, and we will say it again, but this time with emphasis — we really mean it * * * The assessment of credibility is for the trier of fact[.]” Milbradt, 305 Or at 629 .

12014–2014
State v. Lupoli green
or · 2010
1 sentence

2014Application of the rule is “straightforward” when “one witness states directly that he or she believes another witness, or that the other witness is honest or truthful.” Lupoli, 348 Or at 357 ; see State v. Lowell, 249 Or App 364, 366-68 , 277 P3d 588 , rev den, 352 Or 378 (2012) (admission of detective’s testimony that he “didn’t think that [the defendant] was being very honest” during his interview was plain error).

12014–2014
In Re Marriage of Kunze green
or · 2004
2 sentences

2005In Kunze and Kunze, 337 Or 122, 134 , 92 P3d 100 (2004), the court described the importance of the presumption of equal contribution: “That statutory presumption embodies a legislative intent to recognize that, absent evidence to the contrary, each spouse’s efforts during a marriage equally contribute to, and are made for the benefit of, the marital estate, regardless of the nature of thosé efforts or how the property is held. * * * To effectuate that intent, the presumption directs the court, that, unless proven otherwise, the court must find that both parties have contributed equally to the

2005In Kunze and Kunze, 337 Or 122, 134 , 92 P3d 100 (2004), the court described the importance of the presumption of equal contribution: “That statutory presumption embodies a legislative intent to recognize that, absent evidence to the contrary, each spouse’s efforts during a marriage equally contribute to, and are made for the benefit of, the marital estate, regardless of the nature of thosé efforts or how the property is held. * * * To effectuate that intent, the presumption directs the court, that, unless proven otherwise, the court must find that both parties have contributed equally to the

12005–2005
Vendall Marketing Corp. v. Dept. of Justice green
or · 1993
2 sentences

2000One legitimate aim of the investigation may be to discover whether [the recipient's] practices are covered by the Act." Vendall Marketing Corp. v. Dept. of Justice, 318 Or. 189, 195 , 863 P.2d 1263 (1993). [5] This case illustrates the importance of the requirement that special statutory proceedings be separate from other judicial proceedings.

2000One legitimate aim of the investigation may be to discover whether [the recipient's] practices are covered by the Act." Vendall Marketing Corp. v. Dept. of Justice, 318 Or. 189, 195 , 863 P.2d 1263 (1993). [5] This case illustrates the importance of the requirement that special statutory proceedings be separate from other judicial proceedings.

12000–2000
Easley v. Snider green
ca3 · 1994
1 sentence

1999This is not a situation as in Easley, where Pennsylvania’s Attendant Care Program sought to provide persons with a level of independence “greater than one which does nothing more than keep and sustain persons out of institutions.” 36 F3d at 303 .

11999–1999
Bank of Eastern Oregon v. Griffith green
orctapp · 1990
1 sentence

1990The majority recognizes the importance of that inquiry, 101 Or.

11990–1990
Sheehan v. Stackhouse neutral
moctapp · 1881
1 sentence

1912While the appellate courts do not try a law case de novo, yet when the case was tried before the court, they do not attach the same importance to error in the admission of testimony that they do where the trial was by jury. [Sheehan v. Stackhouse, 10 Mo. App. 469 ; Moore v. Mountcastle, 72 Mo. 1 . c. 607; Barnett v. Pepper, 114 Mo. App. 1 . c. 221, 89 S. W. 345 ; Lewis v. Frankle, 138 S. W. 64 .] I have never examined a record since I have been a member of this court that was absolutely free of error, and if every case is too be .reversed because error is found in the record, none will be affi

11912–1912
Barnett v. Pepper neutral
moctapp · 1905
1 sentence

1912While the appellate courts do not try a law case de novo, yet when the case was tried before the court, they do not attach the same importance to error in the admission of testimony that they do where the trial was by jury. [Sheehan v. Stackhouse, 10 Mo. App. 469 ; Moore v. Mountcastle, 72 Mo. 1 . c. 607; Barnett v. Pepper, 114 Mo. App. 1 . c. 221, 89 S. W. 345 ; Lewis v. Frankle, 138 S. W. 64 .] I have never examined a record since I have been a member of this court that was absolutely free of error, and if every case is too be .reversed because error is found in the record, none will be affi

11912–1912
Lewis v. Frankle neutral
moctapp · 1911
1 sentence

1912While the appellate courts do not try a law case de novo, yet when the case was tried before the court, they do not attach the same importance to error in the admission of testimony that they do where the trial was by jury. [Sheehan v. Stackhouse, 10 Mo. App. 469 ; Moore v. Mountcastle, 72 Mo. 1 . c. 607; Barnett v. Pepper, 114 Mo. App. 1 . c. 221, 89 S. W. 345 ; Lewis v. Frankle, 138 S. W. 64 .] I have never examined a record since I have been a member of this court that was absolutely free of error, and if every case is too be .reversed because error is found in the record, none will be affi

11912–1912
Williams v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co. green
moctapp · 1905
1 sentence

1912While the appellate courts do not try a law case de novo, yet when the case was tried before the court, they do not attach the same importance to error in the admission of testimony that they do where the trial was by jury. [Sheehan v. Stackhouse, 10 Mo. App. 469 ; Moore v. Mountcastle, 72 Mo. 1 . c. 607; Barnett v. Pepper, 114 Mo. App. 1 . c. 221, 89 S. W. 345 ; Lewis v. Frankle, 138 S. W. 64 .] I have never examined a record since I have been a member of this court that was absolutely free of error, and if every case is too be .reversed because error is found in the record, none will be affi

11912–1912

Where else courts name it

PA 62 (1939–2025) CA 54 (1860–2025) IL 50 (1941–2026) CT 46 (1922–2024) NY 39 (1870–2022) NJ 27 (1931–2022) MI 22 (1894–2018) TN 18 (1954–2022) TX 18 (1913–2024) MA 16 (1892–2024) IN 16 (1881–2024) MD 16 (1936–2019) FL 15 (1929–2026) ME 14 (1927–2015) OR 14 (1912–2026) MO 13 (1893–2022) OH 12 (1911–2025) WA 12 (1971–2025) AL 12 (1866–2014) WV 12 (1903–2022) KS 9 (1975–2022) WI 9 (1896–2026) IA 9 (1958–2025) AR 8 (1939–2023) CO 8 (1908–2013) NC 7 (1945–2026) DE 7 (1991–2017) ID 6 (1978–2025) VT 6 (1983–2016) DC 6 (1982–2012) UT 6 (1932–2021) AK 6 (1978–2023) GA 6 (1965–2020) SD 6 (1917–2020) KY 5 (1932–2015) ND 5 (1992–2009) OK 5 (1915–2026) VA 5 (1925–2017) RI 5 (1990–2010) MS 4 (1994–2017) AZ 4 (1980–2024) MN 4 (1991–2019) NM 4 (1990–2014) LA 3 (1930–2022) WY 3 (1956–2017) MT 2 (1895–2007) NE 2 (1985–2023) NV 2 (1957–2016) SC 2 (1908–1986)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check