Oregon Supreme Court· 6/16/1994

State v. Cooper

Citations

874 P.2d 822
319 Or. 162
1994 Ore. LEXIS 51

How courts have described this case

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

resolving a dispute over the meaning of an Oregon rule of evidence by considering congressional intent of federal rule of evidence that served as model
considering federal legislative history of a federal evidence rule that was the model for Oregon’s rule, where the United States Supreme Court had not interpreted the federal rule
cases discussing law from another jurisdiction provide context for the Oregon Legislature’s adoption of that jurisdiction’s law
sole possession, payment of expenses and improvements are not sufficient to establish ouster of cotenants
legislative history of federal statute is persuasive in interpreting state statute derived from federal statute, citing other Oregon authority
when legislature models Oregon statute after statute from another jurisdiction, legislature is presumed to have intended same meaning as that given to other statute by highest court of that jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, C.J., and Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Fadeley, Unis and Graber

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.