State v. Arthur

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that ORS 811.335(l)(b) is unambiguous and must be interpreted without inserting what the legislature has omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Chilson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-04-02· cited 7×
• State v. Kelly
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-04-22· cited 3×
• State v. Croxen
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-07-15· cited 1×
• State v. Trout
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2006-08-30

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & Industries
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1993-10-19· cited 2,400×
• State v. Bea
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1993-12-30· cited 57×
• State v. Matthews
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1994-12-02· cited 39×