Breaking: Oregon Supremes slap back Sizemore

Carla Axtman

This morning, the Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the lower Appellate Court decision against Bill Sizemore:

The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

*Appeal from Multnomah County Circuit Court, Jerome E. LaBarre, Judge. 208 Or App 350, 145 P3d 1111, adhered to on recons, 209 Or App 518, 149 P3d 159 (2006).

BALMER, J.

This case requires us to interpret and apply the Oregon Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (ORICO), ORS 166.715 to 166.735. A jury found that defendants--a political action committee and a nonprofit corporation controlled by the same individuals--engaged with others in a pattern of racketeering activity, as defined in ORICO, by forging signatures to qualify two ballot measures for the 2000 general election and by filing false statements with the state from 1998 through 2000 concerning their expenditures and contributions. The jury also found that defendants' illegal conduct injured plaintiffs--two labor organizations--that spent substantial amounts of money opposing the ballot measures. The jury determined that plaintiffs had suffered damages of approximately $840,000, which the trial court trebled pursuant to ORICO. The trial court entered a money judgment in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of approximately $2.5 million and issued an injunction barring defendants from engaging in certain activities. The Court of Appeals reversed one part of the judgment, but otherwise affirmed.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on this blog. All I can really determine is that they've said that the Court of Appeals judgement is affirmed: Sizemore engaged in racketeering, fraud and forgery.

If there are any legal beagles reading the decision, please offer up your professional opinion of the decision in comments.

No doubt Sizemore will have his own interesting spin on this decision later today.

Comments

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Yes, Bill, the rules do apply to you just like everyone else!

    Anyone who has worked with kids knows there can be pushback from any rules. If told all 15 children in a group are to be sitting on the floor in a circle, some will lie down, tussle with their neighbor, walk away. If told they need to be quiet and listen to instructions from an adult--and until they do, the entire group will be forced to be totally silent, some will yell BE QUIET! in a loud voice and think it is funny.

    Back in the day, the man whose initials sum up what many believe of him was called all sorts of names, like "Buffalo Bill", "Seizemore" (his idea of power), and "he thinks he is the King of Sizemoregon and doesn't realize voters have the right to disagree with him".

    Over the years I have come to believe he is basically the guy who never learned to follow rules.

    As the granddaughter of a 1930s Michigan county prosecutor who later became a state AG and State Supreme Court Justice, I say BRAVO! to the State Supreme Court.

  • Lou (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Everytime I hear Sizemore's name it makes me think it is time to support the "Representative Democracy Protection Act" or the ballot measure that will eliminate ballot measures.

  • genop (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'm a lawyer - yes I admit it. I read the opinion and in my most lawyerly prose can confirm that it is a slam dunk against Sizemore and his former PACs. The Supremes made quick work of the causation issue raised. The judgment is indeed affirmed and goes back to the trial court to enter judgment against both PACs. The trial court judge let one off the hook.It matters little, because the PACs are insolvent. The falsified state forms required of the non-profit PAC violate the statutory prohibition against submitting false application for benefits. The remand does not affect the money judgment which remains $2.5 million. The creation of the "non-profit" PAC to hide the identities of contributors, and funneling the non-profit funds to the other PAC was particularly sleazy. How does Sizemore attract investors? Hopefully this will cool his jets.

  • Pedro (unverified)
    (Show?)

    LT has it just right.

    The rules the rest of us adhere to don't apply to people who pass initiative petitions here in Oregon & Washington for the same lame issues over and over again:

    Bill Sizemore Tim Eyman Lon Mabon Marylyn Shannon David Hunicutt Kevin Manix

    The sad truth is despite the ruling today, Bill Sizemore has beaten the legal system and is still doing exactly the same thing he has been found guilty of.

    Perhaps measure 11 should be amended to include a "three strikes" provision for serial initiative petition racketeers.

    • Pedro -
  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)
    <h2> Thanks, Pedro. Good issue to ask legislative, county clerk, Sec. of State candidates about.</h2>

connect with blueoregon