Legal Opinion · Dissent

Starr v. Brotherhood's Relief & Compensation Fund

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 14, 1974Published

1DissentTongue, J.

I must respectfully dissent from the majority opinion because of my belief that: (1) the majority gives the term “willfully or intentionally” a meaning more limited than is proper for the purposes of this ease, and (2) the majority fails to recognize that whether plaintiff acted “willfully or intentionally” is a question of fact upon which there was substantial evidence to support the finding by an able and experienced trial judge.

1. A refusal to obey an order in good faith belief that the order was improper is not “willful or intentional” for the purposes of forfeiting payments due under…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Wampler v. PalmertonOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Richards v. Griffith Rubber MillsDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1969
  3. Chaffin v. ChaffinOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Falls v. MortensenOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Everding & Farrell v. ToftOregon Supreme Court · 1915

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API