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.
12 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Yoshida's Inc. v. Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue LLPgreen2 sentences2025In his third and fourth assignments of error, father argues that the trial court erred when it admitted video recordings of the parties, their children, and a pediatrician that were recorded by mother without consent.3 “Where the trial court admits or excludes evidence based on the court’s interpretation of a statute, we review the court’s ruling for legal error.” Yoshida’s Inc. v. Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue, 272 Or App 436, 443 , 356 P3d 121 (2015), rev den, 358 Or 794 (2016). 2025In his third and fourth assignments of error, father argues that the trial court erred when it admitted video recordings of the parties, their children, and a pediatrician that were recorded by mother without consent.3 “Where the trial court admits or excludes evidence based on the court’s interpretation of a statute, we review the court’s ruling for legal error.” Yoshida’s Inc. v. Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue, 272 Or App 436, 443 , 356 P3d 121 (2015), rev den, 358 Or 794 (2016). | 1 | 3 |
Union Lumber Co. v. Millergreen1 sentence2021Cf. Yoshida’s Inc. v. Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue, 272 Or App 436, 443 , 356 P3d 121 (2015) (“Where the trial court admits or excludes evidence based on the court’s interpretation of a statute, we review the court’s ruling for legal error.”); Union Lumber Co., 360 Or at 785 (noting that, when court’s decision depends on its understanding of the meaning of ORCP rule, we review for errors of law). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jessegreen2 sentences2018See State v. Jesse , 360 Or. 584 , 385 P.3d 1063 (2016) (reviewing for legal error whether trial court correctly excluded expert testimony under OEC 702 on the basis that it did not sufficiently relate to the factual issue for which the defendant had proffered it). 2018See State v. Jesse , 360 Or. 584 , 385 P.3d 1063 (2016) (reviewing for legal error whether trial court correctly excluded expert testimony under OEC 702 on the basis that it did not sufficiently relate to the factual issue for which the defendant had proffered it). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Edwardsgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Edwards, 231 Or App 531, 533 , 219 P3d 602 (2009) (so doing). 2015See State v. Edwards, 231 Or App 531, 533 , 219 P3d 602 (2009) (so doing). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Simons v. Beard
green
2 sentences2023Simons v. Beard, 188 Or App 370, 377 , 72 P3d 96 (2003). 2023Simons v. Beard, 188 Or App 370, 377 , 72 P3d 96 (2003). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Department of Human Services v. A. D. G.
green
1 sentence2022Id. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Krause
green
2 sentences2019THE TRIAL In considering whether a trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress, we review the ruling for legal error. *556 State v. Krause , 281 Or. 2019App. 143 , 145, 383 P.3d 307 (2016), rev. den. , 360 Or. 752 (2017). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Alderwoods (Oregon), Inc.
green
2 sentences2018Alderwoods , 358 Or. at 517 -18 , 366 P.3d 316 . 2018Alderwoods , 358 Or. at 517 -18 , 366 P.3d 316 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Hazlett
green
1 sentence2018State v. Hazlett , 269 Or. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In re the Marriage of Dillard
green
2 sentences2008Specifically, plaintiff asserts that an ORCP 54 B(2) motion is to be granted only if a plaintiff fails to make out a prima facie case, and that we “review such a ruling for legal error, inquiring whether the evidence in the trial record establishes a prima facie case.” Batzer Construction, Inc. v. Boyer, 204 Or App 309, 323 , 129 P3d 773 , rev den, 341 Or 366 (2006) (citing Dillard and Dillard, 179 Or App 24 , 29 n 2, 39 P3d 230 , rev den, 334 Or 491 (2002)). 2008Specifically, plaintiff asserts that an ORCP 54 B(2) motion is to be granted only if a plaintiff fails to make out a prima facie case, and that we “review such a ruling for legal error, inquiring whether the evidence in the trial record establishes a prima facie case.” Batzer Construction, Inc. v. Boyer, 204 Or App 309, 323 , 129 P3d 773 , rev den, 341 Or 366 (2006) (citing Dillard and Dillard, 179 Or App 24 , 29 n 2, 39 P3d 230 , rev den, 334 Or 491 (2002)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Batzer Construction, Inc. v. John Boyer
green
2 sentences2008Specifically, plaintiff asserts that an ORCP 54 B(2) motion is to be granted only if a plaintiff fails to make out a prima facie case, and that we “review such a ruling for legal error, inquiring whether the evidence in the trial record establishes a prima facie case.” Batzer Construction, Inc. v. Boyer, 204 Or App 309, 323 , 129 P3d 773 , rev den, 341 Or 366 (2006) (citing Dillard and Dillard, 179 Or App 24 , 29 n 2, 39 P3d 230 , rev den, 334 Or 491 (2002)). 2008Specifically, plaintiff asserts that an ORCP 54 B(2) motion is to be granted only if a plaintiff fails to make out a prima facie case, and that we “review such a ruling for legal error, inquiring whether the evidence in the trial record establishes a prima facie case.” Batzer Construction, Inc. v. Boyer, 204 Or App 309, 323 , 129 P3d 773 , rev den, 341 Or 366 (2006) (citing Dillard and Dillard, 179 Or App 24 , 29 n 2, 39 P3d 230 , rev den, 334 Or 491 (2002)). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Thorson v. State
green
2 sentences2006Thorson v. Dept. of Justice, 171 Or App 704, 709 , 15 P3d 1005 (2000) (citing Ranger Ins. 2006Thorson v. Dept. of Justice, 171 Or App 704, 709 , 15 P3d 1005 (2000) (citing Ranger Ins. | 1 | 2006–2006 |