Bishop v. KC Development Group, LLC
“Whether a case is moot depends on whether a justiciable controversy exists." Brumnett v. PSRB, 315 Or 402, 405, 848 P2d 1194 (1993). "In a declaratory judgment action like the present one, a justiciable controversy ‘must involve a dispute based on present facts rather than on contingent or hypothetical events.’" TVKO v. Howland, 335 Or 527, 534, 73 P3d 905 (2003).
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Department of Human Resources v. C.L.M.
“If the bases for the juvenile court’s jurisdiction ‘cease to exist,’ then the juvenile court must terminate the warship and dismiss the case[.]" Dept. of Human Services v. T.L., 279 Or App 673, 678, 379 P3d 741 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Dept. of Human Services v. T. L. H.
Under ORS 419B.387, "[i]f the court finds in an evidentiary hearing that treatment or training is needed by a parent to correct the circumstances that resulted in wardship or to prepare the parent to resume the care of the ward, the court may order the parent to participate in the treatment or training if the participation is in the ward's best interests."
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
State v. Coons
“An error is ‘plain; if it is (1) of law, (2) obvious and not reasonably in dispute, and (3) it appears on the record such that there is no need to choose among competing inferences.” State v. Clarke, 300 Or App 74, 80, ___ P3d ___ (2019) (second and third internal quotation marks omitted).
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
State v. Taylor
For crimes resulting in economic damages, the district attorney is required to present evidence of damages “at the time of sentencing or within 90 days after entry of the judgement,” but “the court may extend…[the deadline] for good cause (does not “include prosecutorial inadvertence or neglect”). ORS 137.106(1)(a); State v. Martinez, 246 Or App 383, 387, 265 P3d 92, rev den, 351 Or 507 (2011).
Area(s) of Law:- Remedies
De Lanoy v. Taylor
"[W]hen only one party asks for a declaration, it is incumbent on the court to declare the respective rights of the parties." See Akles v. State of Oregon, 298 Or App 283, 284, 444 P3d 532 (2019).
Area(s) of Law:- Remedies
Dept. of Human Services v. C. M. W.
"A parent raising an inadequate-assistance claim bears the burden of proving 'not only that trial counsel was inadequate, but also that the inadequacy prejudiced the parent's rights to the extent that the merits of the juvenile court's decision are called into serious question.'" Dept. of Human Services v. M. E., 297 Or App 233, 245, 441 P3d 713 (2019).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
De Young v. Brown
Under a substantial benefit theory, for a court to award attorney’s fees under its inherent equitable authority, the party seeking the award must have done so in a representative capacity either “for the benefit of…[an]… entire organization” or if to not award the seeking party would deny or inhibit equitable relief, and the action must have conferred a “substantial benefit” on others. Bova v. City of Medford, 264 Or App 763, 767, 333 P3d 1144, re den, 356 Or 574 (2014); Gilbert v. Hoisting & Port. Engrs., 237 Or 130, 142, 384 P2d 136 (1963), cert den, 376 US 963 (1964).
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Maza v. Waterford Operations, LLC
In interpreting an administrative rule, the Court applies the same general principles applicable to an interpretation of statutes to determine the intention of the administrative agency that adopted the rule. Marshall’s Towing v. Department of State Police, 339 Or 54, 62, 116 P3d 873 (2005).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Mitchell v. State of Oregon
“In reviewing the denial of a post-conviction claim based on inadequate assistance of counsel, the first question is ‘whether petitioner demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that his lawyer failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment.’" Montez v. Czerniak, 355 Or 1, 7, 322 P3d 487 (2014) (citation omitted). "Second, if we conclude that petitioner met that burden, we further must determine whether he proved that counsel’s failure had a tendancy to affect the result of his trial." Id. (citation omitted).
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
State v. Longoria
In State v. Bistrika, the court overturned a conviction by a jury, because the failure to state a limitation on the jury instructions “probably created an erroneous impression of the law in the minds of the jurors which affected the outcome of this case.” State v. Bistrika, 262 Or App 385, 407, 324 P3d 584, rev den, 356 Or 397 (2014).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. M.B.
"Under the current standard, 'serious physical harm' means a nonspeculative threat that the person will not safely survive without treatment, and 'in the near future' means something less immediate than 'imminent' but not so attenuated from present circumstances as to render it speculative." State v. M.A.E., 299 Or App 231, 239-40, 237 448 P3d 656 (2019).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Commitment
State v. Smith
"If there is a significant danger that the jury will be misled by hearing evidence of a writing, act, declaration, or conversation taken out of context the rule [OEC 106] authorizes the supplementary evidence to be admitted contemporaneously." Laird C. Kirkpatrick, Oregon Evidence § 106.04, 69-70 (6th ed 2013).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
Vasilash v. Cain
"Under Article I, section 11, where the effect of an attorney's failure during a jury trial is at issue, only those errors that 'could have tended to affect' the outcome of the trial require [reversal]." Farmer v. Premo, 363 Or 679, 700-01, 427 P3d 170 (2018) (quoting Green v. Franke, 357 Or 301, 322, 350 P3d 188 (2015).)
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Department of Human Services v. A.D.J.
To move from reunification to adoption, a juvenile court must “determine whether [(1) DHS] has made reasonable efforts [towards reunification]…[(2)] the parent has made sufficient progress…[for the child]… to safely return,” and (3) there is an existing circumstance to support abandoning or delaying termination of parental rights. ORS 419B.476(2)(a); ORS 419B.476(5)(d); ORS 419B.498(1)-(2).
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
Dreyer v. PGE
"The term 'law of the case' is best reserved for use in the context in which a party seeks to relitigate an appellate decision. Use of the term to address other issues may confuse rather than clarify." Kennedy v. Wheeler, 356 Or 518, 531, 341 P3d 728 (2014).
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
State v. Craigen
"The subcategories in OAR 213-018-0070 assign a different degree of criminal seriousness based on the type of contraband in the inmate's possession, not the manner in which the inmate used the contraband."
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Gustafson
The Court will consider five factors in its evaluation to determine whether a reasonable inference exists that the evidence will be where the affidavit suggests: "(1) the length of time; (2) the 'perishability' versus the durability of the item; (3) the mobility of the evidence; (4) the 'nonexplicity inculpatory character' of the evidence; and (5) the 'propensity of an individual suspect or general class of offenders to maintain and retain possession of such evidence.'" State v. Van Osdol, 290 Or App 902, 909 (2018) (quoting State v. Ulizzi, 246 Or App 430, 438-39 (2011)).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Miller
"In order to establish that an individual ‘acquires’ a new residence, the state must prove that the person was ‘settled beyond just a transient visitor sojourn.’” State v. LaFountain, 299 Or App 311, 327 (2019).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law