Oregon Supreme Court· 2/19/2016

State v. Ramos

Citations

358 Or. 581
368 P.3d 446
2016 Ore. LEXIS 121
2016 WL 746422

How courts have described this case

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

observing that “there are instances in which attor- ney fees and litigation costs incurred in separate litigation may be recovered as an element of a plaintiff’s damages”
requiring that losses recovered via restitution \must 'result from' a defendant's criminal activity in the 'but-for' sense and also must be a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant's criminal activities\
discussing legislative history of ORS 137.106, and the types of damages that are, and are not, recoverable as restitution
noting the legislature’s incorporation of some civil law concepts into criminal restitution proceedings
characterizing the “question at issue in [that] case” as “whether reasonable foreseeability is a limiting concept that a court must consider in deciding whether to award the par- ticular damages sought as restitution” (emphasis added)
declining to apply the “direct” causation standard proposed by the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Balmer, Kistler, Walters, Landau, Baldwin, Brewer, Nakamoto

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

57 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 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.