Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Oregonian Publishing Co. v. O'Leary

303 Or. 297 (Or. 1987)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Oregonian Publishing Co. v. O'Leary

2 Citing cases

  1. Doe v. Corp. of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

    352 Or. 77 (Or. 2012)   Cited 11 times
    In Doe v. Corp. of Presiding Bishop, 352 Or. 77, 280 P.3d 377 (2012), this court recently applied its three-step interpretive paradigm for original constitutional provisions to the open courts clause to determine whether the press was entitled to the release of certain trial exhibits after the conclusion of a trial.

    This court, in describing that institution, has stated that “[t]he fundamental function of courts is to determine legal rights based upon a presentation of evidence and argument.” Oregonian Publishing Co. v. O'Leary, 303 Or. 297, 303, 736 P.2d 173 (1987). Our cases uniformly have applied the “open courts” provision to the circuit courts of this state.

  2. Oregon Newspaper Publishers v. Dept. of Corrections

    156 Or. App. 30 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 2 times

    The phrase "justice shall be administered" has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to be limited to "adjudications." In Oregonian Publishing Co. v. O'Leary, 303 Or. 297, 303, 736 P.2d 173 (1987), the court explained that "[t]he primary limitation on the scope of section 10 is that it is directed only at adjudications. To the extent that adjudications are not involved, the administration of justice is not governed by it.