permit requirement (Oregon) · Go Syfert
← Oregon issues

permit requirement in Oregon

9 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 1929–2025 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Outdoor Media Dimensions, Inc. v. Department of Transportationgreen
or · 2006 · cited in 4 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2006–2025
2 sentences

2025Id. at 301 .4 The Court could have ended the different treat- ment either by: (1) striking from the OMIA the exemp- tion from the permit requirement for on-premises signs or (2) striking the permit requirement itself as it applied to off- premises signs.

2025Id. at 301 .4 The Court could have ended the different treat- ment either by: (1) striking from the OMIA the exemption from the permit requirement for on-premises signs or (2) striking the permit requirement itself as it applied to off- premises signs.

24
Oregon Occupational Safety & Health Division v. CBI Services, Inc.green
or · 2014 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017See OR-OSHA v. CBI Services, Inc., 356 Or 577, 585 , 341 P3d 701 (2014) (identifying circumstances justifying deference to an agency’s statutory construction).

2017See OR-OSHA v. CBI Services, Inc., 356 Or 577, 585 , 341 P3d 701 (2014) (identifying circumstances justifying deference to an agency’s statutory construction).

11
Brower Ex Rel. Estate of Caldwell v. County of Inyogreen
scotus · 1989 · cited in 1 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
2 sentences

2001See, e.g., Brower v. Inyo County, 489 US 593, 599 , 109 S Ct 1378 , 103 L Ed 2d 628 (1989) (discussing requirements of proximate causation with respect to section 1983 claims).

2001See, e.g., Brower v. Inyo County, 489 US 593, 599 , 109 S Ct 1378 , 103 L Ed 2d 628 (1989) (discussing requirements of proximate causation with respect to section 1983 claims).

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Lake Oswego Preservation Society v. City of Lake Oswego green
or · 2016
2 sentences

2017We generally interpret statutes by “examining] the statutory text in context, along with its legislative history, applying as needed relevant rules and canons of construction.” Lake Oswego Preservation Society v. City of Lake Oswego, 360 Or 115, 124 , 379 P3d 462 (2016).

2017We generally interpret statutes by “examining] the statutory text in context, along with its legislative history, applying as needed relevant rules and canons of construction.” Lake Oswego Preservation Society v. City of Lake Oswego, 360 Or 115, 124 , 379 P3d 462 (2016).

12017–2017
Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. State Land Board green
orctapp · 2007
1 sentence

2013Finally, the law also contained more stringent permitting requirements for salmonid streams by requiring a permit before any material could be removed from those streams, except for ‘activities customarily associated with agriculture.’” Id. at 261 .

12013–2013
City of Eugene v. Miller green
or · 1994
2 sentences

2006In that aspect of its case, petitioner relies on Purcell and City of Eugene v. Miller, 318 Or 480 , 871 P2d 454 (1994), both of which involved ordinances that effectively prohibited certain forms of speech.

2006In that aspect of its case, petitioner relies on Purcell and City of Eugene v. Miller, 318 Or 480 , 871 P2d 454 (1994), both of which involved ordinances that effectively prohibited certain forms of speech.

12006–2006
Van v. Travel Information Council green
orctapp · 1981
1 sentence

1997As discussed *122 above, the OMIA’s permit requirement is not content-based, 22 150 Or App at 117-18, Van, 52 Or App at 408-09 , and the relocation and transfer provisions apply to all billboards, regardless of the content of their messages.

11997–1997
State v. Haynes neutral
or · 1925
2 sentences

1929The unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor within this state is a statutory offense; and, as heretofore held by this court in State v. Haynes, 116 Or. 635 ( 242 Pac. 603 ), the admission of evidence of the possession of such liquor in a cause wherein such possession constitutes a distinct offense, having no relation to or bearing upon the issues to be determined, will constitute reversible error. * * Treating of the general principles of evidence, our Code provides that collateral questions should be avoided, but that it is within the discretionary power of the court to permit inquiry into

1929The unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor within this state is a statutory offense; and, as heretofore held by this court in State v. Haynes, 116 Or. 635 ( 242 Pac. 603 ), the admission of evidence of the possession of such liquor in a cause wherein such possession constitutes a distinct offense, having no relation to or bearing upon the issues to be determined, will constitute reversible error. * * Treating of the general principles of evidence, our Code provides that collateral questions should be avoided, but that it is within the discretionary power of the court to permit inquiry into

11929–1929

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.700 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.705 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.735 (4) USC § 42u.s.c.1983 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 174.040 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 183.482 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.710 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.712 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.715 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.725 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.765 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 377.992 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 66 (1894–2023) CT 61 (1965–2026) TX 34 (1935–2017) NY 33 (1927–2019) IL 23 (1910–2025) NJ 21 (1956–2026) VT 13 (1998–2026) MA 13 (1945–2021) WA 12 (1985–2023) WI 11 (1963–2016) MI 11 (1957–2026) PA 11 (1941–2021) FL 10 (1938–2021) OR 9 (1929–2025) AR 8 (1951–2012) ND 8 (1977–2019) MN 8 (1979–2016) MD 8 (2001–2026) CO 7 (1972–2025) IN 7 (1926–2019) UT 6 (2013–2018) NH 6 (1952–2012) AZ 6 (1976–2020) NC 6 (1972–2020) IA 6 (1930–2026) ME 5 (2000–2012) OH 5 (1982–2014) OK 5 (1934–2017) HI 4 (2006–2018) MO 4 (1981–2021) LA 4 (1976–2023) SD 4 (2013–2022) TN 3 (1940–2006) DC 3 (1990–2017) NM 3 (1980–2009) GA 3 (1981–2011) KY 3 (1928–2018) WV 3 (1997–2015) SC 3 (1998–2018) VA 3 (1967–2001) AL 3 (1973–1995) NE 2 (1970–2025) WY 2 (1983–1985)

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