Oregon Supreme Court· 5/9/2019

State v. Lien

Citations

441 P.3d 185
364 Or. 750

How courts have described this case

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

noting “first, that privacy— freedom from government scrutiny—is a fundamental prin- ciple and value protected by Article I, section 9 and, second, that privacy is grounded in particular social contexts”
although Article I, section 9, rights are “not defined by private property or contractual rights,” they “may inform the analysis in a given case”
court was bound by trial court’s finding that the private person had acted “exclusively at the request and direction of the police”
“For purposes of Article I, section 9, a ‘search’ occurs when governmental action invades a protected pri- vacy interest.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.)
“For purposes of Article I, section 9, a ‘search’ occurs when governmental action invades a protected pri- vacy interest.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.)
“Tortious invasion of privacy is one of the limited number of torts in Oregon in which a plaintiff may be awarded damages consisting solely of mental suffering caused by the violation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kistler, Nakamoto

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

46 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.