Van Buskirk v. Ryan
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, P. J.
Respondent appeals a permanent stalking protective order (SPO) issued pursuant to ORS 30.866 prohibiting him from having any contact with petitioner. He argues that, because all of his contacts with petitioner were communicative and there is no evidence that he ever threatened her, the order violates his free speech rights under Article I, section 8, of the Oregon Constitution. On de novo review, Osborne v. Fadden, 225 Or App 431, 433, 201 P3d 278, rev den, 346 Or 213 (2009), we affirm.
A detailed recitation of the facts would not be of assistance to the bench or bar. To briefly summarize,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. RangelOregon Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. MoyleOregon Supreme Court · 1985
- Habrat v. MilliganCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Weatherly v. WilkieCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Osborne v. FaddenOregon Supreme Court · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. RyanOregon Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
- T. M. E. v. StropeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- C. Q. R. v. WafulaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- State v. RyanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.