holding that "the validity of an expired or superseded rule is not ‘kept alive’ for mootness purposes by the fact that the superseded rule may have some continuing effect on the application or validity of a current rule"
Summary of this case from Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. v. Or. Health Auth.December 12, 2000
December 19, 2000
holding that "the validity of an expired or superseded rule is not ‘kept alive’ for mootness purposes by the fact that the superseded rule may have some continuing effect on the application or validity of a current rule"
Summary of this case from Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. v. Or. Health Auth.concluding that a rule challenge was moot where the rule had been superseded and, therefore, a ruling on the validity of the rule would have no practical effect on the petitioners (citing Edmunson v. Dept. of Ins. and Finance , 314 Or. 291, 295, 838 P.2d 589 (1992) )
Summary of this case from W. States Petroleum Ass'n v. Envtl. Quality Comm'nrecognizing that APA exclusivity serves the same purposes as the exhaustion requirement, because "the APA establishes a comprehensive pattern for the judicial review of administrative decisions"
Summary of this case from Minfang Wang v. Or. Bd. of Massage Therapistsexplaining that an instruction that is neutral regarding the inference it may draw from particular evidence is permissible
Summary of this case from State v. Wiltserequiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before this court may assert jurisdiction over groundwater rights
Summary of this case from Harrell v. Tilleyexplaining BOLI's process for adopting PWRs
Summary of this case from Northwest Inc. v. Bureau of LaborFull title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Dec 19, 2000
Indeed, in every subsequent case, the court has held explicitly that justiciability includes the requirement…
State v. T. C. (In re T.C.)This accords with our longstanding recognition that the state's failure to comply with an "integral part of…