Corbin Moeller

United States Supreme Court (3 summaries)

California v. Texas

“Where a standing theory rests on speculation about the decision of an independent third party (here an individual's decision to enroll in a program like Medicaid), the plaintiff must show at the least “that third parties will likely react in predictable ways.” Department of Commerce v. New York, 588 U.S. ___, ___, 139 S. Ct. 2551, 2566, 204 L. Ed. 2d 978.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Garland v. Ming Dai

The INA provides that a reviewing court must accept “administrative findings” as “conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” §1252(b)(4)(B).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Immigration

Caniglia v. Strom et al.

The “community caretaking exception” to warrantless searches articulated in Cady v. Dombrowski does not apply to homes, because there is a constitutional difference between vehicles and homes.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

United States Supreme Court Certiorari Granted (2 summaries)

Alaska v. Wright

A habeas petitioner does not remain "in custody" under a conviction "after the sentence imposed for it has fully expired, merely because of the possibility that the prior conviction will be used to enhance the sentences imposed for any subsequent crimes of which he is convicted.” Maleng v. Cook, 490 U. S. 492 (1989).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Habeas Corpus

Houston Community College System v. Wilson

Whether the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause limits a local government’s censure power.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Oregon Supreme Court (2 summaries)

Estate of Evans v. Dept. of Rev.

“If the resident's interest in the intangible property is sufficiently substantial, such that it is a source of actual or potential wealth to and cannot be dissociated from the resident, then his or her enjoyment of the benefits and protections offered by the state—including simply the benefit of living in an 'orderly, civilized society' for which the state is responsible, J.C. Penney Co., 311 U.S. at 444—is a sufficient justification for the state to impose its tax on that property.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Tax Law

Allianz Global Risks v. ACE Property & Casualty Ins. Co.

"The existence of side agreements, indemnification promises, or an insured's waiver of policy terms is simply irrelevant to the contribution rights set out in the OECAA. Under that statute, as under our coverage cases, see Ledford v. Gutoski, 319 Ore. 397, 399-400, 877 P2d 80 (1994), whether an insurance company has a 'duty to defend or indemnify' its insured depends on two documents: the insurance policy and the complaint."

Area(s) of Law:
  • Business Law

Oregon Court of Appeals (23 summaries)

Dept. of Human Services v. D.E.A.

A juvenile court may change a child’s permanency plan away from reunification only if DHS proves, among other things, that DHS made “active efforts” to make it possible for the child to be reunited with the parent and, notwithstanding those efforts, the parent’s progress was insufficient to make reunification possible. Dept. of Human Services v. D. L. H., 251 Or App 787, 798, 284 P3d 1233, adh’d to as modified on recons, 253 Or App 600, 292 P3d 565 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 445 (2013).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Juvenile Law

Diens v. Bonome

“Under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations began to run on petitioner's claim when petitioner knew 'or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known facts which would make a reasonable person aware of a substantial possibility that each of the three elements of a claim (harm, causation, and tortious conduct) exist[ed].' McLean, 189 Ore. App. at 424-25.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trusts and Estates

NW Metals, Inc. v. Driver & Motor Vehicle Servs. Div.

A single legal entity cannot take physical possession of a vehicle from itself, nor can it take possession of a vehicle's ownership record from itself. See OAR 735-152-0000(1).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Business Law

Patton v. Cox

"We must affirm despite trial court error if there is little likelihood that the error affected the verdict." State v. Parkerson, 310 Ore. App. 271, 278, 484 P3d 356 (2021). "To make that determination, the court considers the instructions as a whole and in the context of the evidence and record at trial, including the parties' theories of the case with respect to the various charges and defenses at issue." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

State v. Brown

“Preservation rules are 'pragmatic as well as prudential,' and they are intended to promote the administration of justice, not subvert it.” Peeples v. Lampert, 345 Or 209, 220, 191 P3d 637 (2008).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Tokarski v. Wildfang

When a director acted in a way that was clearly prohibited by the governing documents, or failed to take an action that was clearly required by the governing documents, a factfinder could find that the director acted with reckless disregard to the corporation's best interest, as that interest has been defined by the corporation's governing documents, and, thus, with reckless disregard to the attendant breach of fiduciary duty. WSB Investments, LLC v. Pronghorn Devel. Co., LLC, 269 Or App 342, 362 (2015).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

Dept. of Human Services v. C. W.

To change a permanency plan from reunification to anything else, under ORS 419B.476, DHS must prove by a preponderance of the evidence both: (1) that DHS made "reasonable efforts" to reunify the child with mother; and (2) that, notwithstanding those efforts, mother's progress was not sufficient to allow reunification. Dept. of Human Services v. V. A. R., 301 Ore. App. 565, 567, 456 P3d 681 (2019).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

Pistol Resources, LLC v. McNeely

The material terms of an easement agreement are explicitly "to obtain the right to use the existing roads and to construct and use roads across lands of the other for forest management purposes and for the purpose of transporting logs and other forest products, agricultural products and minerals" and desired to "grant, one to the other, such rights." Sander v. Nicholson, 306 Ore. App. 167, 174, 473 P3d 1113, rev den, 367 Ore. 290, 476 P.3d 1255 (2020).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Property Law

State v. Anotta

Pursuant to ORS 137.010, it is error for the court to impose that fee outside the defendant's presence because doing so prevents the defendant from arguing for such a suspension. State v. Baccaro, 300 Or. App. 131, 137 (2019).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Gayman

Operators of motor assisted scooters are not generally subject to the provisions of the vehicle code that apply to motor vehicles and their operators because motor assisted scooters are not physically capable of operating in the same manner as a motor vehicle, and the vehicle code reflects that distinction.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Much v. Doe

“An application for an order is a motion. Every motion, unless made during trial, shall be in writing, shall state with particularity the grounds therefor, and shall set forth the relief or order sought.” ORCP 14.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

State v. Tharp

“[A]n inference cannot be "supported by mere speculation" but "must be reasonable, based on the record.” See Aguirre-Rodriguez II, 367 Or. at 623

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Anderson v. Sullivan

Although a court may deny fees on fees in connection with unsuccessful aspects of a fee request, it is legally incorrect to say that a party "cannot" recover any fees on fees unless all of the requested fees were awarded.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Landlord Tenant

State v. Berglund

A "court's sentencing authority exists solely by virtue of a statutory grant of power and therefore cannot be exercised in any manner not specifically authorized." State v. Coventry, 290 Or App. 463, 464 (2018). However, a claim is not precluded by this rule when a proceeding for violating a condition of probation is initiated “during the probation period.” State v. Ludwig, 218 Or 483, 492 (1959).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Hernandez v. Catholic Health Initiatives

Anyone qualifying as a "person" under ORS 659A.001(9) may be an aider or abettor of an unlawful employment practice in a way that subjects them to liability under ORS 659A.030(1)(g).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

State v. Escudero

Absent an independent constitutional justification, a drug-detecting dog generally cannot, consistent with Article I, section 9, sniff a car for drugs during a traffic stop. State v. Soto-Navarro, 309 Or. App. 218, 223 (2021).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

State v. Shevyakov

Asking for consent to search, including requesting that a suspect perform FSTs, constitutes impermissible interrogation unless the law precludes the use of the person’s refusal against that person at trial.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Gladd v. Lucarelli

A FAPA restraining order is available upon a showing that (1) the Petitioner has been the victim of abuse committed by the Respondent within the 180 days preceding the filing of the petition, (2) there is an imminent danger of further abuse to the Petitioner, and (3) the Respondent represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the Petitioner or the Petitioner’s child. ORS 107.718(1)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Etzel

Scientific knowledge cannot assist the trier of fact if it is not 'scientifically valid.' State v. O'Key, 321 Ore. 285, 293, 899 P2d 663 (1995).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Jenkins v. Cain

“For claims of ineffective counsel based on failure to investigate, establishing the performance prong is a fact specific endeavor, which must consider the ‘context of the legal proceeding at issue.’” Snyder v. Amsberry, 306 Or. App. 439, 449-450 (2020).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

State ex rel. Kotek v. Fagan

"A writ of mandamus may be issued to any inferior court, corporation, board, officer or person, to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins, as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station[.]” ORS 34.110.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Constitutional Law

Department of Human Services v. K.S.S.

To change a permanency plan from reunification to adoption, “the proponent of the change must prove that, despite DHS’s reasonable efforts to reunify the parent with his or her child, the parent has not made sufficient progress for the ward to safely return home.” Dept. of Human Services v. C. E., 288 Or App 649, 656, 406 P3d 211 (2017) (internal quotation  marks  omitted); ORS 419B.476(2)(a).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

State V. Bock 310 Or App 329 (2021)

The plain view doctrine does not apply to digital searches because “electronic devices contain ‘unprecedented’ amounts of personal information, and, unlike physical searches, searches of electronic devices require examination of at least some information that is beyond the scope of the warrant.” State v. Mansor, 363 Or 185, 208, 220, 421 P3d 323 (2018).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Back to Top