Stellar J Corp. v. Smith & Loveless, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1DissentIkuta, J.
The Oregon Supreme Court has given us our marching orders. “When the text of a statute is truly capable of having only one meaning, no weight can be given to legislative history that suggests — or even confirms — that legislators intended something different.” State v. Gaines, 346 Or. 160, 173, 206 P.3d 1042 (2009). The Oregon Supreme Court expects the state legislature to know this rule, and quoted (with approval) Representative Max William’s statement that “We still have to mean what we say when we say it. We can’t say, black and then * * * all agree that black meant white. That’s not going…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- Abbott v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- Ram Technical Services, Inc. v. KoreskoOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. CunninghamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- Pincetich v. NolanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.