State v. Reynolds, 246 OrApp 152 (2011)

Holding:   Where Defendant signed a lease and, after missing some agreed-on payments, promised to “get back on track,” but, after a period of months, was evicted and left owing a disputed amount of money, there was no evidence from which to infer a conscious effort to steal by deception.

1)   When attempting to ascertain legislative intent, Courts “first look at the text and context of the statute, and will consider legislative history if it appears useful to the court’s analysis.” at p. 158.

2)  When analyzing a statute’s text, Courts give “words of common usage their ‘plain, natural and ordinary meaning.’” cite omitted. at p. 159.

3)   The phrase “intent to defraud” means different things in different statutes. at p. 159, ftn 4 and accompanying text.

4)   Prior case law supports the statutory interpretation announced in this case. at p. 159.

Filed under: uncategorized

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!