Search a rule number or topic in circuit-court local rules and statewide UTCR. County filters select sources; they do not determine the court, venue or applicable law.
36 Oregon counties · 27 local rulebooks · 24 UTCR chapter PDFsMachine-extracted or machine-OCR source text, not independently validated legal requirements. Later amendments, case orders, exceptions, signatures, service, fees and deadlines require original-source review. Reserved and repealed chapters do not create requirements.
Reserved and repealed-only chapters are retained as such. Amendment and supplemental orders are searched separately because their extracted text may include deleted or superseded provisions. Some scans have machine OCR, visibly labeled and unreviewed. Remaining scans have original-source links only. Verify all text and amendment markings in the PDF.
Official local rules ↗ ·
Official current UTCR ↗
Search public rule numbers or topics. Leave out names, case numbers and private document text.
Stored source matches
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 15
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 15 · 2026
A-14 • Numbered lines can assist with precise citations to pleadings. • Overall, the benefits of removing numbered lines—readability, accessibility, and efficiency—appear to outweigh the downsides. Based on its discussion of the foregoing considerations, the committee voted by consensus to recommend approval. Following the fall 2025 meeting, the committee received several public comments, summarized below: • Many commenters described the requirement as outdated, burdensome, and difficult to format, especially across platforms. They noted that federal and many state courts operate effectively without line numbering, and that page and paragraph citations are sufficient. • Several commenters emphasized that line numbering interferes with OCR and PDF‑to‑Word conversion, slows drafting, creates formatting errors, and poses unnecessary barriers for attorneys, staff, and self‑represented litigants. Removing the requirement was viewed as improving readability, accessibility, and workflow effic…
Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt
Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.
Captured 2026-10-18T22:31:09.969140+00:00 · Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-08-01; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text Only approved-change pages1-25 and out-of-cycle amendment pages94-101 are indexed. Disapproved proposals, deferred recommendations and administrative actions on pages26-93 and102-105 remain source context only. This packet is not consolidated rule text; dates differ by provision.
Publisher order or amendment document. Deleted/added wording and operative scope must be read in the original; do not treat every extracted sentence as an active rule.
Source provenance
machine_extracted_unreviewed
SHA-256 4d3584770d44af58f80c4ebf07da611b26a865195202c369dba2f465261fb0a5
Publisher URL: https://www.courts.oregon.gov/rules/UTCR/CJO_2026-021.pdf
PJO 26-14 Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings — physical PDF page 1
PJO 26-14 Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings · physical PDF page 1 ·
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF STATE OF OREGON FOR MARION COUNTY ) PRESIDING JUDGE ORDER In the Matter of: Disclosure of the Use of ) Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings ) 26MARPJO No. 26-14 ) PURPOSE: This Order governs the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools (including but not limited to large language models, AlI-assisted legal research tools, and AlI-drafted text) in documents submitted to this court. Its purpose is to ensure accuracy, maintain the integrity of the judicial process, and reinforce counsel’s professional obligations. Al-assisted tools may be used for research, drafting, or summarization, but they do not replace the professional judgment, independent verification, or legal obligations of counsel or self-represented litigants. Users must review and confirm the accuracy of any Al-generated text, citations, or legal authority. I HEREBY FIND THAT: ORCP 17 provides that when an attorney or party signs or submits a pleading, motion, or similar document, they …
Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt
Machine OCR, unreviewed; recognition errors and lost amendment markings are possible. Verify the original PDF.
Captured 2026-10-18T22:32:44.067349+00:00 · Publisher library classifies this order CURRENT on retrieval; operative status, amendments, rescissions and case applicability have not been independently legally reviewed. Machine OCR generated 2026-10-18T22:59:06.138132+00:00 with tesseract v5.5.3.20260724; unreviewed recognition, layout and amendment-marking errors are possible.
Publisher order or amendment document. Deleted/added wording and operative scope must be read in the original; do not treat every extracted sentence as an active rule.
Source provenance
machine_ocr_unreviewed
SHA-256 63038c4242e407e9330a26b7e384954035210a29df04bda072158b088ec4fcf0
Publisher URL: https://www.courts.oregon.gov/rules/Documents/MAR_PJO26-14.pdf
Court visitor order: Marion (09.22.2025).pdf — physical PDF page 2
Court visitor order: Marion (09.22.2025).pdf · physical PDF page 2 ·
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PRESIDING JUDGE ORDER b) Shadow a current Visitor on 1 occasion prior to being assigned a case of their own, after which a current Visitor shall shadow the new Visitor for 1 case and provide feedback to the court. c) Attend and observe 1 protective proceeding hearings at earliest convenience. d) Complete Language Line training. 3) Visitors shall utilize the following standards and procedures in the performance of their duties: a) Visitors shall interview the respondent/protected person in-person. b) Visitors shall conduct interviews of all persons deemed by the visitor to have relevant information. c) Visitors shall review all relevant records regarding the respondent, to the extent such records are available. d) Visitors shall comply with ORS 125.150. e) The Visitor’s report shall comply with ORS 125.155, using the form required by UTCR 9.400 and/or Supplemental Local Rule, if applicable. f) The Visitor shall b…
Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt
Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.
Captured 2026-10-18T23:01:50.110212+00:00 · Retained from official OJD county-specific court visitor library. Library dates are document labels, not verified effective dates; operative status and case applicability remain unreviewed.
Publisher order or amendment document. Deleted/added wording and operative scope must be read in the original; do not treat every extracted sentence as an active rule.
Source provenance
machine_extracted_unreviewed
SHA-256 e2fc88e3e895ba53c32aaf98a19de53f2bfe501375964605e82fb83d2c826df2
Publisher URL: https://www.courts.oregon.gov/programs/family/guardianship-conservatorship/Documents/Marion%20(09.22.2025).pdf
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 8
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 8 · 2026
A-7 41. 26.160—PRIVILEGE AGAINST DISCLOSURE FOR COLLABORATIVE LAW COMMUNICATION; ADMISSIBILITY; DISCOVERY Adopt a new rule regarding the application of privilege in a collaborative law proceeding. See related items B.25–B.40 and B.42–B.44. 42. 26.170— WAIVER AND PRECLUSION OF PRIVILEGE Adopt a new rule regarding waiver and preclusion of waiver during a collaborative law proceeding. See related items B.25–B.41 and B.43–B.44. 43. 26.180—LIMITS OF PRIVILEGE Adopt a new rule regarding the limits of privilege for collaborative law communications. See related items B.25–B.42 and B.44. 44. 26.190—AUTHORITY OF TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF NONCOMPLIANCE Adopt a new rule regarding authority of a tribunal in cases of noncompliance. See related items B.25–B.43. C. DEFERRED RECOMMENDATIONS The UTCR Committee did not issue a recommendation with regard to the following related proposals to amend UTCR chapter 12—Mediation. See section IV.C for a detailed explanation. 1. 12.010—APPLICABILITY Modify the rule lan…
Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt
Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.
Captured 2026-10-18T22:31:09.969140+00:00 · Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-08-01; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text Only approved-change pages1-25 and out-of-cycle amendment pages94-101 are indexed. Disapproved proposals, deferred recommendations and administrative actions on pages26-93 and102-105 remain source context only. This packet is not consolidated rule text; dates differ by provision.
Publisher order or amendment document. Deleted/added wording and operative scope must be read in the original; do not treat every extracted sentence as an active rule.
Source provenance
machine_extracted_unreviewed
SHA-256 4d3584770d44af58f80c4ebf07da611b26a865195202c369dba2f465261fb0a5
Publisher URL: https://www.courts.oregon.gov/rules/UTCR/CJO_2026-021.pdf
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 14
CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 14 · 2026
A-13 2. 2.010—FORM OF DOCUMENTS Amended to remove the requirement to prepare pleadings, motions, and requested instructions with numbered lines. ACTION TAKEN No motion was made to change the committee’s preliminary recommendation of approval. Accordingly, by committee convention, the October 24, 2025, preliminary recommendation became the committee’s final recommendation of approval. EXPLANATION This proposal, submitted by Judge Matthew A. Rowan, Circuit Court Judge, Jackson County Circuit Court, amends UTCR 2.010(4) to remove the requirement that all pleadings, motions, and requested instructions be prepared with numbered lines. Prior to the fall 2025 meeting, the proponent provided the following written testimony: • The proposed changes eliminate the need for pleading paper. The requirement of pleading paper is outdated and does not align with federal pleading or Oregon appellate court briefing format requirements. In a digital age, requiring numbered pages serves no purpose. In fact…
Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt
Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.
Captured 2026-10-18T22:31:09.969140+00:00 · Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-08-01; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text Only approved-change pages1-25 and out-of-cycle amendment pages94-101 are indexed. Disapproved proposals, deferred recommendations and administrative actions on pages26-93 and102-105 remain source context only. This packet is not consolidated rule text; dates differ by provision.
Publisher order or amendment document. Deleted/added wording and operative scope must be read in the original; do not treat every extracted sentence as an active rule.
Source provenance
machine_extracted_unreviewed
SHA-256 4d3584770d44af58f80c4ebf07da611b26a865195202c369dba2f465261fb0a5
Publisher URL: https://www.courts.oregon.gov/rules/UTCR/CJO_2026-021.pdf