Oregon Sheriff’s Association Civil Process Manual, $350

Oregon State Sheriffs’ 2014 Civil Process Manual:

You can sometimes find this in your county law library.

Any attorney seeking to expand his or her knowledge working on matters involving civil process will benefit from this informative seventeen chapter civil process manual.

The Oregon State Sheriffs’ 2014 Civil Process Manual features topics of interest, including service and enforcement of various types of process, whether it be notice or enforcement process, effective service of orders, enforcement of pre-judgment and post-judgment remedies

  • Execution: The manual discusses the most current methods of executing on personal and real property based on a monetary judgment or a judgment of foreclosure.
  • Garnishment: Garnishment of financial institutions, individual companies, multiple debtors, and other issues
  • Process: Issuance of process, including writs of execution and writs of garnishment in justice courts or municipal courts – Registering judgments entered in lower courts
  • County Clerk Lien Record: The role of the Clerk County Lien Record on the enforcement of judgments and support orders
  • Writs/Orders of Assistance: Enforcement of writs of assistance and orders of assistance for the recovery of children
  • Enforcement of abuse restraining orders and stalking orders
  • Landlord/Tenant Actions
  • Concealed Handgun License chapter

Oregon “Cameras Up Skirts” Bill: 2015 HB 2596 (amending ORS 163.700)

Oregon 2015 House Bill (HB) 2596: “Provides that person who records another person’s intimate areas commits crime of invasion of personal privacy.

(Note: See also HB 2356, which “Provides that person who records another person’s intimate areas commits crime of invasion of personal privacy. Increases penalty for crime of invasion of personal privacy if defendant has certain prior convictions or person recorded is under 18 years of age.”)

I’m not sure how a mere mortal would find these bill numbers very efficiently, so here are a few keywords: intimate image, visual recording, undergarments, clothing, photographs, etc. Read on about HB 2596:

“ORS 163.700 is amended to read:

“Provides that person who records another person’s intimate areas commits crime of invasion of personal privacy.

Creates crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image. Punishes by maximum of one year’s imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both for first offense, and five years’ imprisonment, $125,000 fine, or both for subsequent offense.

(c) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording of another person’s intimate areas without the consent of the person being recorded.
(2) As used in this section:
(a) “Intimate areas” means undergarments that are being worn by a person, are covered by clothing and are intended to be protected from being seen….” Read the full bill and any legislative history and budget impact reports that are generated….

Tip: Bills are rewritten during the legislative process. Sometimes multiple bills on a single topic are introduced in a legislative session.

And don’t forget to search for Senate bills on this subject, e.g. SB 188: Creates crime of unlawful dissemination of intimate image

Use OLIS to track current and previous Oregon Legislation. We like OLIS a lot (but really, really wish it went back further than 2007)!

If you’ve made it this far, here’s a link to the  Wikipedia article “Upskirting and Downblousing Around the World”

Oregon Constitution on “Vacancy in office of Governor”

Line of succession is governed by the Oregon Constitution. (Note: Oregon does not have a Lieutenant Governor.)

See also Wikipedia and Ballotpedia (and this one) and Secretary of State on succession of the Oregon Governor.

Oregon Constitution Article V (or read the entire Oregon Constitution and early Oregon Constitutions):

“Section 8. Vacancy in office of Governor. [Constitution of 1859; Amendment proposed by S.J.R. 10, 1920 (s.s.), and adopted by the people May 21, 1920; Amendment proposed by S.J.R. 8, 1945, and adopted by the people Nov. 5, 1946; Repeal proposed by initiative petition filed July 7, 1972, and adopted by the people Nov. 7, 1972 (present section 8a of this Article adopted in lieu of this section)]

Section 8a. Vacancy in office of Governor. In case of the removal from office of the Governor, or of his death, resignation, or disability to discharge the duties of his office as prescribed by law, the Secretary of State; or if there be none, or in case of his removal from office, death, resignation, or disability to discharge the duties of his office as prescribed by law, then the State Treasurer; or if there be none, or in case of his removal from office, death, resignation, or disability to discharge the duties of his office as prescribed by law, then the President of the Senate; or if there be none, or in case of his removal from office, death, resignation, or disability to discharge the duties of his office as prescribed by law, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall become Governor until the disability be removed, or a Governor be elected at the next general biennial election. The Governor elected to fill the vacancy shall hold office for the unexpired term of the outgoing Governor.

The Secretary of State or the State Treasurer shall appoint a person to fill his office until the election of a Governor, at which time the office so filled by appointment shall be filled by election; or, in the event of a disability of the Governor, to be Acting Secretary of State or Acting State Treasurer until the disability be removed. The person so appointed shall not be eligible to succeed to the office of Governor by automatic succession under this section during the term of his appointment. [Created through initiative petition filed July 7, 1972, and adopted by the people Nov. 7, 1972 (this section adopted in lieu of former section 8 of this Article)]”

Emergency Clauses in the Oregon Constitution and Laws – Referendum Power Reserved to the People

“My View: Emergency clause abuses democracy,” Portland Tribune, 27 January 2015, by Richard F. LaMountain


Oregon Constitution

Art. 1, Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper….

Article IV, Section 1. Legislative power; initiative and referendum. (1) The legislative power of the state, except for the initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people, is vested in a Legislative Assembly, consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives….

Article IV, Section (3)(a) The people reserve to themselves the referendum power, which is to approve or reject at an election any Act, or part thereof, of the Legislative Assembly that does not become effective earlier than 90 days after the end of the session at which the Act is passed.

[Link to the Oregon Constitution PDF or Blue Book web version.]

The Glossary at the Oregon Legislature’s website defines:

Emergency Clause:

A statement added to the end of a measure that causes the Act to become effective before the accustomed date (on January 1 of the year after passage of the Act). An emergency clause either sets a specific date or is effective immediately, which means that the measure will take effect on the date it is signed into law.”


“The submission of a measure passed by the Legislature to a vote of the people. In Oregon, either the Legislature or citizens, by petition, may cause a measure passed by the Legislature to be placed on the ballot for a vote. In the case of a legislative referral, both houses of the Legislature must vote to refer the measure. Such referrals cannot be vetoed by the Governor. In the case of a citizen referendum, supporters of the referendum must obtain a specified number of signatures from registered voters. The number of signatures required is determined by a fixed percentage of the votes cast for all candidates for governor at the general election preceding the filing of the petition. Any change to the Oregon Constitution passed by the Legislature requires referral to voters. (See also: Initiative)

Excerpt from: “My View: Emergency clause abuses democracy,” Portland Tribune, 27 January 2015, by Richard F. LaMountain:

…. In Oregon’s political order, do state lawmakers recognize the people’s primacy — or game the system to impose their own?

Oregon’s constitution guarantees its citizens the right of referendum, to put laws passed by their Legislature to a public vote. In recent years, however, lawmakers have routinely saddled many laws with an “emergency clause,” which shields those laws from a referendum challenge and thereby nullifies the referendum right.

In the legislative session beginning Feb. 2, voters should demand an end to this cynical, undemocratic practice.

“No act shall take effect,” stipulates Oregon’s constitution, “until ninety days from the end of the session at which the same shall have been passed, except in case of emergency; which emergency shall be declared in … the law.” [Link to full Portland Tribune article.]

Oregon Courts Enable Online Filing for Domestic Violence Restraining Orders (FAPA)

The Media Release, “Oregon Courts Make It Easier to Complete Documents in Domestic Violence Restraining Order Cases,” can be found from OJD Media Releases, What’s New (for 1/15/15).

If you have trouble reaching the actual online FAPA service from the URL in the Media Release, it’s not you (there’s a rogue www in the URL), so go to the OJD Restraining Orders – Family Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) webpage and look for the “Use Online Question-and-Answer Interview based eForms” link.

It doesn’t say so clearly, but you will likely need to create an account so be prepared to create a user-name and password. This feature enables you to return to your form later to complete or correct it.

Also, note the important warning, clearly stated on the first page:

WARNING: Your Internet activity can be tracked. It is impossible to completely clear the “footprints” showing where each site visitor has been. If the person who is harming you has access to your computer, use a trusted friend’s computer or a computer at the library. If you need immediate assistance, call 911 or the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233 and TTY 1-800-787-3224.”

Most Oregon public and county law libraries have computers you can use to complete your request for a court order.

Excerpt from the Media Release:

Preparing documents in Family Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) restraining order cases will be simpler starting today. Electronic interview-based forms now available on all Oregon circuit court websites will make it easier for parties to fill out and file FAPA documents with the courts.

To be able to provide these types of forms has been a long-time goal of the Chief Justice, State Family Law Advisory Committee (SFLAC), judges, and administrators throughout the Oregon Judicial Department (OJD). The forms, which have been used in Multnomah County since September 2012, use a simple online interview process to make sure all statutorily-required information is provided. The user then prints the forms for court filing. The process makes it easier for petitioners and respondents in FAPA cases to complete the forms, and more efficient for the courts to adjudicate these cases because the form is complete and legible.

The forms are available through the Oregon Judicial Department (OJD) website [bad link – see above]. There is no charge to people using this service.

Forms available in this program allow people to apply for, modify, dismiss, or challenge a FAPA restraining order. Approximately 10,000 FAPA cases are filed in Oregon courts each year….

Stay safe!

Update on the Oregon Ballot Measure Archive Project, 1959-2007

The Ballot Measure Archive Project (BMAP) is invaluable for anyone researching Oregon legal history. You can find the digital archives at:

Portland State University (PSU), Special Collections & University Archives. (Currently, find the direct link under “More Collections.“)

Brief Description:

“The Ballot Measure Archive Project (BMAP) was a five-year project led by Josh Binus and included over 120 researchers, mostly Portland State University undergraduates. Josh Binus, a public historian and Portland State University history instructor, began the project in 2004 to document and preserve surviving evidence from Oregon’s history of direct democracy. The State of Oregon has earliest established initiative and referendum system in the United States and that has been one of the most active users of the system during that time. The project goal was to collect the materials not being accessioned by the Oregon State Archives, because a substantial number of players in the initiative system work outside of the state government. Author: Pete Asch

Visit the PSU Special Collection site for more information and access to the files.

Thank you Josh and PSU!

Oregon Attorney General’s 2014 Public Records and Meetings Manual

The  Oregon Attorney General’s 2014 Public Records and Meetings Manual is available for viewing and purchase.  (The last edition was published in 2011.)

Please visit the ODOJ website for information on downloading and ordering options.

Oregon Judicial Branch Four Year Report (2011-2014)

You can link directly to the 2011-2014 Oregon Judicial Branch Four Year Report or, if that link doesn’t work, visit the OJD homepage or the OJD Media Releases page and start searching. You’ll find lots of other interesting information, too.

Statistics on litigants without lawyers are staggering and deeply disturbing. People need lawyers. Navigating the legal system, the court system, and indeed, even just reading a contract you think you want to sign requires a level of legal literacy and analysis beyond what even the best legal researcher can acquire. People need the advice of lawyers. But that costs money.

Excerpt from the report:

Healthy Courts Provide Resources for Self-Represented Litigants:

Statistics show that self-represented litigants don’t think they can afford an attorney, don’t believe they need an attorney for their particular case, do not obtain any advice from an attorney about their case, are likely to be low income, and may have language or cultural barriers. Guaranteed by law, the right to represent oneself in court is a citizen’s choice. The economic slump of recent years has forced more middle income litigants to represent themselves as well, increasing the need for courts to ensure that these individuals receive adequate access to justice. OJD’s efforts to prepare self-represented litigants for court include self-help resources and staff, public law libraries, statewide forms, and user-friendly technology. A nationwide average of 80% of family law cases will involve at least one, and often two, self-represented litigants. The manner in which judges handle these cases in court determines whether or not both parties will receive a fair hearing. Courtroom practices by judges and staff, such as shifting from legal terminology to plain language; explaining what will occur during the hearing and reviewing what the legal issues are; pointing out who has to the convince the judge and how strong the evidence has to be; and prompting the parties to provide information represent the court’s commitment to safeguarding
justice for the self-represented.

Oregon eCourt technology will upgrade OJD’s online processes and resources for self-represented litigants, including online interactive forms. A statewide forms project is in the works and will base a series of interactive online forms on Multnomah County Circuit Court’s current Family Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) TurboCourt™ form for restraining orders. The interactive form program asks the applicant a series of questions, populating the form with the applicant’s answers, and results in a document to submit to the court that complies with applicable rules without the need for court staff assistance in filling out the form….” [Link to full report.]

2014 Promulgated Amendments to the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure (ORCP)

December 6, 2014


The following amendments to the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure have been promulgated by the Council on Court Procedures for submission to the 2015 Legislative Assembly. Pursuant to ORS 1.735, they will become effective January 1, 2016, unless the Legislative Assembly by statute modifies the action of the Council.

The amended rules are set out with both the current and amended language. New language is shown in boldface with underlining, and language to be deleted is italicized and bracketed.

Please note that, during its December 6, 2014, meeting, the Council made non-substantive changes to ORCP 1, 9, 27, 46, 54, and 68 in order to conform to the conventions and language of the existing Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure and/or to clarify the intention of the rule changes. The specific sections amended at the meeting were:

ORCP 1 A, 1 F
ORCP 9 B, 9 C
ORCP 27 B, 27 B(3), 27 B(4), 27 D
ORCP 46 B(2), 46 D
ORCP 54 B(3)
ORCP 68 A(2), 68 C(2)(a), 68 C(4)(a), 68 C(5)(a), 68 C(5)(b), 68 C(5)(b)(i)

Link to full 12/6/14 ORCP report.