Appellate Cases

STOLL BERNE has achieved success in a number of appellate cases including:

Nadia Dahab Prevails in Oregon Supreme Court in Habeas Case
On October 6, 2016, Nadia Dahab prevailed in the Oregon Supreme Court in a habeas case in which she represented an inmate who had been convicted of a crime under Oregon law but was incarcerated in a Florida prison pursuant to the Interstate Corrections Compact. The inmate had petitioned for habeas relief in Oregon, alleging that Florida prison policies violated his free exercise rights under Article I, sections 2 and 3, of the Oregon Constitution. The trial court dismissed his petition, concluding that the fact that the inmate was confined in an out-of-state institution precluded him from seeking habeas relief in Oregon.

In the Oregon Supreme Court, Dahab successfully argued that inmates transferred to out-of-state institutions pursuant to the Interstate Corrections Compact retain their Oregon state constitutional rights and that the inmate in this case could petition for habeas relief in Oregon state court on the ground that his conditions of confinement in Florida violated the Oregon constitutional rights to which he was entitled. The Court held that "[i]f Oregon officials are knowingly confining [an inmate] in a facility where his state or federal constitutional rights are being violated, those officials are engaging in state action that is subject to challenge in a habeas proceeding in Oregon." Read the opinion here.

Nadia Dahab and Josh Ross Protect Judgment in Favor of Stoll Berne Client on Appeal
Nadia Dahab and Josh Ross successfully defended a judgment obtained for Stoll Berne's client, securing a complete victory for the client following a multi-year litigation. In July 2015, Stoll Berne Shareholder Josh Ross prevailed at trial on behalf of a client involved in a title dispute over a significant investment property. The trial court awarded Stoll Berne's client a full interest in the property and denied the plaintiff any interest. The plaintiff appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals. In January 2017, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision in full. The plaintiff then asked the Oregon Supreme Court to review the case and, on June 1, 2017, that Court issued an order denying the plaintiff's request for further review. Dahab and Ross represented Stoll Berne's client on appeal. With the Supreme Court's order, the trial court's ruling in favor of Stoll Berne's client is final.

Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners, 361 Or. 507 (2017)
In June 2017, Nadia Dahab and Steve Berman represented the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), which appeared as amicus curiae in the Supreme Court aligned with the Board of Architects, in an appeal of the Board order imposing sanctions on two individuals. The question before the Court was whether the petitioners—Twist and two of its principals—had engaged in the unlawful “practice of architecture” and represented themselves as architects in violation of Oregon law. In their amicus brief, Dahab and Berman, along with Ron Jacobs of Venable LLP, explained how the profession defines the “practice of architecture” and how the petitioners’ conduct—which included preparing drawings, master plans, and renderings—fell well within the scope of that definition. The Supreme Court, looking to the manner in which the Oregon legislature defined the “practice of architecture,” agreed, noting that whether conduct constitutes the “practice of architecture” does not depend on whether the planned buildings or other structures are, in fact, constructed. The Court’s opinion can be found here.

Yox v. Providence Health Plan, 659 F. App'x 941 (9th Cir. 2016)
In September 2016, Nadia Dahab and trial attorney Megan Glor prevailed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in an ERISA case dealing with the question whether Providence Health Plan’s Independent Review Organization (IRO) constituted an “arbitration” within the meaning of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The Ninth Circuit, looking to federal law for guidance, concluded that the IRO process was significantly different than common arbitration and therefore not an “arbitration” within the meaning of the FAA. The Ninth Circuit’s unpublished disposition, captioned Yox v. Providence Health Plan, can be found here. Dahab argued the case before the Ninth Circuit.

State of Oregon v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., 269 Or. App. 31 (2015)
On remand from the Oregon Supreme Court, we successfully and completely reversed the trial court's dismissal of a multi-million dollar securities fraud action against a national insurance brokerage firm.

Slayman v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 765 F.3d 1033 (2014)
In a class action brought on behalf of roughly 350 Oregon pickup and delivery drivers, we successfully challenged a trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant on the issue of whether the drivers were defendant's employees as a matter of Oregon law. The Ninth Circuit reversed the summary judgment decision and ruled that the drivers were employees.

State of Oregon v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., 353 Or. 1 (Or. S.Ct. 2012)
We worked with the Oregon Department of Justice on a successful appeal before the Oregon Supreme Court that established securities "fraud on the market" doctrine under Oregon law.

Synectic Ventures I, LLC v. EVI Corp, 353 Or. 62 (Or. S.Ct. 2012)
We were the briefing and arguing counsel in the successful appeal before the Oregon Supreme Court that reversed summary judgment and held that a Limited Liability Company Manager may have breached fiduciary duties in acting in dual capacities.

Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (2007)
We represented consumers before the United States Supreme Court in this class action claim against Safeco Insurance Company under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.  We established a lower recklessness standard for proof of "willful" violations of statute.

Crandon Capital Partners v. Willamette Indus. Inc., 342 Or. 555 (Or. S.Ct. 2007)
We argued and won an Oregon Supreme Court case that established the right of derivative shareholders to recover attorney fees for forcing a corporation to drop its objections to a takeover bid in response to litigation.

Citizen Savings and Loan v. McDonald, 191 Or. App. 45, 80 P.2d 532 (2003)
We successfully represented an individual in an appeal of a $1.4 million judgment.  The Oregon Court of Appeals vacated the entire judgment.

Richards v. Manke and The Big Red Tomato Company, Inc., 176 Or. App. 170, 30 P.3d 1230 (2001)
We successfully represented a respondent on appeal in a dispute regarding a farming business.  The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the case without an opinion.

First Commerce of America, Inc. v. Nimbus Center Associates, 329 Or. 199, 986 P.2d 556 (1999)
We represented clients in a petition for review before the Oregon Supreme Court.  The Oregon Supreme Court accepted review and, without oral argument, reversed the court of appeals' decision regarding the appropriate remedy.