Rena Meeks v. Opp Health and Rehabilitation, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the longstand- ing presumption that any funds deposited as bail or security by a third party were presumed to belong to the defendant was wrong
• explaining that the longstand- ing presumption that any funds deposited as bail or security by a third party were presumed to belong to the defendant was wrong
• explaining considerations for determining whether funds posted as security by a third-party can be considered financial resources of the defendant
• noting that “the fact that there are surplus funds from a security deposit that could be available to cover costs under ORS 135.265(2) does not absolve the trial court of its respon- sibility to consider whether a defendant has the ability to pay, as required by ORS 161.665(4)”
• when funds deposited by a third party “belong to a defendant, they may be used to satisfy the defendant’s financial obligations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).