State v. Getsinger

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because statute directed restitution to “aggrieved party” reparation must be limited to party “who initially suffers loss”
• concluding that insurer could not recover under ORS 137.540(10) (1976), because insurer was not an “aggrieved party”
• car insurer, which paid owner’s claims arising out of unauthorized use of car, was not “aggrieved party” within meaning of statute providing for restitution to “aggrieved party” upon grant of probation
• car insurer, which paid owner's claims arising out of unauthorized use of car, was not \aggrieved party\ within meaning of statute providing for restitution to \aggrieved party\ upon grant of probation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).