Court of Appeals of Oregon· 3/28/2012

State v. Jordan

Citations

274 P.3d 289
249 Or. App. 93
2012 WL 1022922
2012 Ore. App. LEXIS 393

How courts have described this case

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

noting that alleged error was undecided and therefore, under the circumstances of that case, reasonably in dispute
finding that unpreserved error was “reasonably in dispute” where the court had never decided the issue and did “not necessarily agree” with the argument advanced
explaining that the victim’s wife’s testimony about the benefit that naturo- pathic treatment and organic foods provided the victim was sufficient to establish necessity
relying on testimony from the victim's wife about expenses that the victim had incurred in treating a brain injury caused by the defendant's intoxicated driving
stating, in dicta, in a criminal restitution case that evidence of “medical bills do not establish reasonable charges necessarily incurred” for the purpose of ORS 31.710(2)(a)
explaining that we are bound by a trial court’s finding of fact that the expenses were necessarily incurred if there is “some evidence from which the trial court could find that the disputed expenses were necessary” (emphasis omit- ted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schuman, Wollheim, Nakamoto

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 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.