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 1872–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
BMW of North America, Inc. v. Goregreen2 sentences2018See Parrott v. Carr Chevrolet, Inc ., 331 Or. 537 , 558 n. 14, 17 P.3d 473 (2001) ("a party cannot challenge a verdict for punitive damages as excessive until after the jury renders its verdict" (emphasis in original) ). 10 On the merits of its excessiveness challenge before the trial court, BP relied on the standard used by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore , 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed. 2d 809 (1996), to evaluate whether punitive damages are excessive, arguing that the same standard applies to evaluate whether statutory damages comport with due process. 2018See Parrott v. Carr Chevrolet, Inc ., 331 Or. 537 , 558 n. 14, 17 P.3d 473 (2001) ("a party cannot challenge a verdict for punitive damages as excessive until after the jury renders its verdict" (emphasis in original) ). 10 On the merits of its excessiveness challenge before the trial court, BP relied on the standard used by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore , 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed. 2d 809 (1996), to evaluate whether punitive damages are excessive, arguing that the same standard applies to evaluate whether statutory damages comport with due process. | 1 | 1 |
Parrott v. Carr Chevrolet, Inc.green2 sentences2018See Parrott v. Carr Chevrolet, Inc ., 331 Or. 537 , 558 n. 14, 17 P.3d 473 (2001) ("a party cannot challenge a verdict for punitive damages as excessive until after the jury renders its verdict" (emphasis in original) ). 10 On the merits of its excessiveness challenge before the trial court, BP relied on the standard used by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore , 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed. 2d 809 (1996), to evaluate whether punitive damages are excessive, arguing that the same standard applies to evaluate whether statutory damages comport with due process. 2018See Parrott v. Carr Chevrolet, Inc ., 331 Or. 537 , 558 n. 14, 17 P.3d 473 (2001) ("a party cannot challenge a verdict for punitive damages as excessive until after the jury renders its verdict" (emphasis in original) ). 10 On the merits of its excessiveness challenge before the trial court, BP relied on the standard used by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore , 517 U.S. 559 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 , 134 L.Ed. 2d 809 (1996), to evaluate whether punitive damages are excessive, arguing that the same standard applies to evaluate whether statutory damages comport with due process. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Moore v. Floyd
green
2 sentences1907The right to appeal and to enjoy the fruits of a judgment or decree are totally inconsistent, and an election to take one course is a renunciation of the other: Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 ; Portland Construction Co. v. O’Neil, 24 Or. 54 ( 32 Pac. 764 ); Bush v. Mitchell, 28 Or. 92 ( 41 Pac. 155 ). 1893In Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 , this court held that “ a party cannot claim the benefit of a judgment, and at the same time appeal from it. | 2 | 1893–1907 |
Kelly v. Tracy
green
2 sentences2006At the contempt hearing, husband testified that his appellate counsel had confirmed the correctness of his position; however, he testified that he had “already figured that out for [himself].” Moreover, his testimony was given in the context of his ultimate assertion that he did not have “any choice in the matter, if I wish to appeal those items.” Before the trial court, husband relied on Kelly v. Tracy, 209 Or 153, 161 , 305 P2d 411 (1956), where the court stated the familiar rule that “[a] party may waive the right to appeal by acquiescence in or recognition of the validity of a judgment or 2006At the contempt hearing, husband testified that his appellate counsel had confirmed the correctness of his position; however, he testified that he had “already figured that out for [himself].” Moreover, his testimony was given in the context of his ultimate assertion that he did not have “any choice in the matter, if I wish to appeal those items.” Before the trial court, husband relied on Kelly v. Tracy, 209 Or 153, 161 , 305 P2d 411 (1956), where the court stated the familiar rule that “[a] party may waive the right to appeal by acquiescence in or recognition of the validity of a judgment or | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Pacific General Contractors, Inc. v. Slate Construction Co.
green
2 sentences1969In support of this contention plaintiff cites Pacific General Contractors v. Slate Construction Co., 196 Or 608 , 251 P2d 454 (1952), which holds that a party cannot claim the benefit of a judgment and then appeal from it. 1969In support of this contention plaintiff cites Pacific General Contractors v. Slate Construction Co., 196 Or 608 , 251 P2d 454 (1952), which holds that a party cannot claim the benefit of a judgment and then appeal from it. | 1 | 1969–1969 |
Clark v. Hindman
green
2 sentences1915Under the rule applied in Clark v. Hindman, 46 Or. 67 ( 79 Pac. 56 ), this party cannot claim any rights superior to those of T. 1915Under the rule applied in Clark v. Hindman, 46 Or. 67 ( 79 Pac. 56 ), this party cannot claim any rights superior to those of T. | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Portland Construction Co. v. O'Neil
green
2 sentences1907The right to appeal and to enjoy the fruits of a judgment or decree are totally inconsistent, and an election to take one course is a renunciation of the other: Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 ; Portland Construction Co. v. O’Neil, 24 Or. 54 ( 32 Pac. 764 ); Bush v. Mitchell, 28 Or. 92 ( 41 Pac. 155 ). 1907The right to appeal and to enjoy the fruits of a judgment or decree are totally inconsistent, and an election to take one course is a renunciation of the other: Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 ; Portland Construction Co. v. O’Neil, 24 Or. 54 ( 32 Pac. 764 ); Bush v. Mitchell, 28 Or. 92 ( 41 Pac. 155 ). | 1 | 1907–1907 |
Bush v. Mitchell
green
2 sentences1907The right to appeal and to enjoy the fruits of a judgment or decree are totally inconsistent, and an election to take one course is a renunciation of the other: Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 ; Portland Construction Co. v. O’Neil, 24 Or. 54 ( 32 Pac. 764 ); Bush v. Mitchell, 28 Or. 92 ( 41 Pac. 155 ). 1907The right to appeal and to enjoy the fruits of a judgment or decree are totally inconsistent, and an election to take one course is a renunciation of the other: Moore v. Floyd, 4 Or. 260 ; Portland Construction Co. v. O’Neil, 24 Or. 54 ( 32 Pac. 764 ); Bush v. Mitchell, 28 Or. 92 ( 41 Pac. 155 ). | 1 | 1907–1907 |
Kelly v. Bloom
neutral
1 sentence1872(Kelly v. Bloom, 17 Abb. | 1 | 1872–1872 |
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.