Hetherington v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that whether a party “encouraged commis- sion of the error in question or made a strategic choice not to object” are relevant to whether this court will “exercise its discretion” to reverse an asserted plain error
• stating that whether a party “encouraged commis- sion of the error in question or made a strategic choice not to object” are relevant to whether this court will “exercise its discretion” to reverse an asserted plain error
• stating that whether a party “encouraged commis- sion of the error in question or made a strategic choice not to object” are relevant to whether this court will “exercise its discretion” to reverse an asserted plain error
• upholding Court of Appeals decision not to overturn trial court ruling in similar situation
• affirming our decision not to undertake plain error review and stating, “In Clay/Luttrell v. Pay Less Drug Stores, 276 Or 673, 677, 556 P2d 125 (1976), this court said that ‘invited error is not a basis for reversal’”
• objection to admissibility of hearsay under OEC 803(18a)(b) not sufficient to preserve objection on constitutional grounds

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).