Court of Appeals of Oregon· 9/14/2016
State v. Lammi
Citations
- 281 Or. App. 96
- 380 P.3d 1257
- 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 1078
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- allowing in camera review of counselling records to determine whether they fell within an exception to statutory confidentiality requirement
- burden on party seeking in camera review to make a threshold showing
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hadlock, Lagesen, Sercombe
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
6 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. BrayCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-10-12· cited 15×
- MAT, Inc. v. American Tower Asset Sub, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-06-03· cited 10×
- State v. BentonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-02-09· cited 5×
- State v. CovingtonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-05-02· cited 3×
- State v. GuffeyCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-05-16· cited 3×
- State v. CockrellCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-04-12· cited 3×
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.