State v. Montgomery

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that whether conduct was acci- dental was relevant to willfulness in a contempt proceed- ing—there, the defendant testified that she had dialed her ex-husband’s phone number by mistake, in violation of the terms of a restraining order
• “[A] finding of ‘willfulness’ within the meaning of [the contempt] statute requires of finding of‘voluntary noncompliance’ with a court order.” (Citing Couey and Couey, 312 Or 302, 306, 821 P2d 1086 (1991).)
• \We conclude that the trial court erred in ruling that it is not necessary to determine whether defendant's violation of a prior court order was accidental in order to determine whether that violation was 'willful' within the meaning of the contempt statute.\
• “accidental” violation of restraining order is not “willful”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Nicholson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-11-02· cited 27×
• Oregon Education Ass'n v. Oregon Taxpayers United
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-11-07· cited 18×
• Lopez v. Oregon State Hospital
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2025-07-30· cited 18×
• Elizabeth Lofts Condos. Owners' Ass'n v. Victaulic Co.
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-08-29· cited 7×
• State v. Crombie
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-12-24· cited 7×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State ex rel. Badger v. Couey
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1991-12-12· cited 23×
• In re Marriage of Barrett
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1994-11-25· cited 19×
• In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Chase
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2005-10-27· cited 9×