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.
7 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 1917–2004 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Barber v. Gladden
green
2 sentences2004Defendant relies on ORS 34.710, which provides, in part, “No question once finally determined upon a proceeding by habeas corpus shall be reexamined upon another proceeding of the same kind.” Defendant also relies on the Supreme Court’s statement in Barber v. Gladden, 215 Or 129, 133 , 332 P2d 641 (1958): “[ORS 34.710] is a legislative declaration that the principle of res judicata is applicable to habeas corpus proceedings. 2004Defendant relies on ORS 34.710, which provides, in part, “No question once finally determined upon a proceeding by habeas corpus shall be reexamined upon another proceeding of the same kind.” Defendant also relies on the Supreme Court’s statement in Barber v. Gladden, 215 Or 129, 133 , 332 P2d 641 (1958): “[ORS 34.710] is a legislative declaration that the principle of res judicata is applicable to habeas corpus proceedings. | 3 | 1998–2004 |
Parker v. Reter
green
2 sentences1984The opinion goes on to state: “* * * However, ORS 607.045, as we construe it, includes a proscription against negligently permitting livestock to run upon a highway and in this respect constitutes a legislative declaration of a standard of conduct which, if violated, would give rise to liability. * * *” 234 Or at 547 n 2, 383 P2d at 94 n 2. 1984The opinion goes on to state: “* * * However, ORS 607.045, as we construe it, includes a proscription against negligently permitting livestock to run upon a highway and in this respect constitutes a legislative declaration of a standard of conduct which, if violated, would give rise to liability. * * *” 234 Or at 547 n 2, 383 P2d at 94 n 2. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Henthorne v. Hopwood
green
1 sentence1965As I said in the Henthorne case, "it seems little more than a fiction to assume that in the enactment of traffic laws the legislature or a city council intended to prescribe the scope of relief available to persons seeking compensation for injuries in automobile cases." [1] ( 218 Or at 341 ). *495 It may be conceded that traffic laws represent a legislative declaration of the standard of conduct which a person must meet in using the public highways. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Stewart v. Wild
green
1 sentence1963Griffin v. Benton, 92 Ga App 167, 88 SE2d 287 (1955); Stewart v. Wild, 196 Iowa 678 , 195 NW 266 (1923). | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Griffin v. Benton
green
1 sentence1963Griffin v. Benton, 92 Ga App 167, 88 SE2d 287 (1955); Stewart v. Wild, 196 Iowa 678 , 195 NW 266 (1923). | 1 | 1963–1963 |
Fong Yue Ting v. United States
green
1 sentence1917The state has power to prescribe the rules of evidence which shall be observed by its judicial tribunals: Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U. S. 729 ( 37 L. | 1 | 1917–1917 |
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.