Summary
explaining that the legislature “certainly knows how” to enact wording that communicates an intent that a statutory scheme be exclusive
Summary of this case from Richardson v. Or. Dep't of Transp.Opinion
October 2, 2003
explaining that the legislature “certainly knows how” to enact wording that communicates an intent that a statutory scheme be exclusive
Summary of this case from Richardson v. Or. Dep't of Transp.October 2, 2003
explaining that the legislature “certainly knows how” to enact wording that communicates an intent that a statutory scheme be exclusive
Summary of this case from Richardson v. Or. Dep't of Transp.noting that the "particular controls over the general" maxim is "subject to manipulation": "[T]he same statutes may be characterized as specific or general depending on which features a court chooses to emphasize."
Summary of this case from State v. Vedderexplaining that "appropriate inquiry is whether the legislature has enacted statutory wording that communicates an intention that a particular statutory scheme is exclusive"
Summary of this case from State ex Rel. City of Powers v. Coos County Airportexamining other statutes to determine whether legislature typically uses particular wording to communicate an intention that a statutory scheme is exclusive
Summary of this case from Pierce v. Dept. of Public Safety StandardsIn Coats, the same parties disputed Coats's obligation to pay prevailing wage rates to employees working at a different rock quarry excavating materials for use on a different highway construction project.
Summary of this case from Coats-Sellers v. StateFull title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Oct 2, 2003
In fact, under our existing case law, that absence can be quite significant. See Oregonians for Sound…
Powell v. BunnNancy Powell is Remington's mother and appears both as his guardian ad litem and in her own capacity. The…