Simpson v. Department of Fish & Wildlife
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife
1Opinion of the CourtRosenblum, J.
ORS 498.002(1) provides, in part, that “[w]ildlife is the property of the state.” Petitioners own game ranches in Oregon. Most of their animals are defined by administrative rule as “wildlife.” Petitioners sought a declaratory ruling from the Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) as to whether their animals are the “property of the state” under ORS 498.002(1). ODFW ruled that the state does not own or have any proprietary or possessory interest in petitioners’ animals. Petitioners seek judicial review, arguing that ODFW erred in failing to declare that their animals are the property of the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- Hughes v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Toomer v. WitsellSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Jones v. General Motors Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Anthony v. VeatchOregon Supreme Court · 1950
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. DickersonOregon Supreme Court · 2015
- International Ass'n of Fire Fighters, Local 3564 v. City of Grants PassCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- State v. DickersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
- State v. MankillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- State v. MankillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.