Oregon court rules & publisher orders

CJO 2026-028 — Approving Out-of-Cycle Amendments of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 to Authorize Electronic Submission of Documents Up to 50 MB in Size — physical PDF page 2

CJO 2026-028 — Approving Out-of-Cycle Amendments of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 to Authorize Electronic Submission of Documents Up to 50 MB in Size · physical PDF page 2 · 2026

A–1 ATTACHMENT A TO CJO NO. 26-028 21.040 FORMAT OF DOCUMENTS TO BE FILED ELECTRONICALLY (1) A document submitted electronically to the court must be in the form of a Portable Document Format (PDF) or a Portable Document Format/A (PDF/A) file that does not exceed {50}[25] megabytes. A document that exceeds the size limit must be broken down and submitted as separate files that do not exceed {50}[25] megabytes each. A filer submitting separate files under this section must include in the Filing Comments field for each submission a description that clearly identifies the part of the document that the file represents, for example, “Motion for Summary Judgment, part 1 of 2.” (2) Except as provided in subsections (a) or (b) of this section or in UTCR 24.040(3)(a), when a document to be electronically filed incorporates a documentary exhibit, an affidavit, a declaration, a certificate of service, or another document, the electronic filing must be submitted as a unified single PDF file, rathe…

Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt

Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.

Captured 2026-10-18T22:31:17.039508+00:00 · Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-07-22; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text

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.

CJO 2026-028 — Approving Out-of-Cycle Amendments of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 to Authorize Electronic Submission of Documents Up to 50 MB in Size — physical PDF page 1

CJO 2026-028 — Approving Out-of-Cycle Amendments of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 to Authorize Electronic Submission of Documents Up to 50 MB in Size · physical PDF page 1 · 2026

1 In the Matter of Approving Out-of- Cycle Amendments of Uniform Trial Court Rules (UTCR) 21.040 and 21.070 to Reflect Changes in the Oregon Judicial Department’s Electronic Filing System ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER No. 26-028 ORDER APPROVING OUT-OF-CYCLE AMENDMENTS OF UNIFORM TRIAL COURT RULES 21.040 AND 21.070 TO AUTHORIZE ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS UP TO 50 MEGABYTES IN SIZE I HEREBY FIND THAT: 1. ORS 1.002(2)(d) authorizes the Chief Justice to make rules governing electronic filing in Oregon’s circuit courts. 2. The Oregon Judicial Department’s electronic filing system has been updated to allow electronic submission of documents up to 50 megabytes in size. I HEREBY ORDER, pursuant to ORS 1.002 and UTCR 1.020, the following: 1. Good cause has been shown and the time limits established by UTCR 1.020(2), (3), and (4) are waived for the amendment of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070. 2. UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 are amended, as shown in Attachment A to this order. For the convenien…

Open publisher PDF at this page ↗ · Read complete stored excerpt

Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.

Captured 2026-10-18T22:31:17.039508+00:00 · Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-07-22; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text

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.

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 101

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 101 · 2026

A-43 (c) A separate petition for waiver must be filed in each judicial district in which the person desires a waiver. (d) If the court grants a petition for waiver, the bar [member]{licensee} obtaining the waiver must (i) File a copy of the court’s order in each case subject to the waiver; and (ii) Include the words “Exempt from eFiling per Waiver Granted [DATE]” in the caption of all documents conventionally filed during the duration of the waiver. (e) If the court grants a motion for waiver, the bar [member]{licensee} obtaining the waiver must include the words “Exempt from eFiling per Waiver Granted [DATE]” in the caption of all documents conventionally filed in the case. (3) If the electronic filing system is continuously unavailable for a period of more than 24 hours, an active [member]{licensee} of the Oregon State Bar may file documents using conventional filing until the end of the first full business day after the day on which the electronic filing system becomes available. * …

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.

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 100

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 100 · 2026

A-42 5. 21.140—MANDATORY ELECTRONIC FILING Changed references from “member” to “licensee.” See related items D.1 and D.3–D.4. ACTION TAKEN Amendment of the rule was preliminarily recommended by consensus at the UTCR Committee’s fall meeting on October 24, 2025. The rule was then amended out of cycle by CJO 25-051, effective January 1, 2026. No public comments were received. EXPLANATION See also the background explanation for related item D.1. The amendment to UTCR 21.140(1)–(3) changed “member” to “licensee” to conform to SB 166. The committee agreed by consensus to recommend approval of the amendment out of cycle to align with the effective date of SB 166. AMENDMENT 21.140 MANDATORY ELECTRONIC FILING (1) An active [member]{licensee} of the Oregon State Bar must file a document using the electronic filing system, instead of using conventional filing, unless: (a) The document is required to be conventionally filed under UTCR 21.070(3); or (b) The filer has obtained a waiver under subsec…

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.

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 9

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 9 · 2026

A-8 6. 12.060—QUALIFICATION AS AN APPROVED GENERAL CIVIL MEDIATOR, ONGOING OBLIGATIONS Amend the basic training and ongoing obligations requirements for mediators. See related items C.1–C.5 and C.7–C.14. 7. 12.070—QUALIFICATION AS AN APPROVED DOMESTIC RELATIONS CUSTODY AND PARENTING MEDIATOR, ONGOING OBLIGATIONS Amend the training and ongoing obligations requirements for domestic relations custody and parenting mediators. See related items C.1–C.6 and C.8–C.14. 8. 12.080—QUALIFICATION AS AN APPROVED DOMESTIC RELATIONS FINANCIAL MEDIATOR, ONGOING OBLIGATIONS Amend the training and ongoing obligations requirements for domestic relations financial mediators. See related items C.1–C.7 and C.9–C.14. 9. 12.090—INDEPENDENT QUALIFICATION REVIEW Change the title and revise the rule to conform with proposed amendments to UTCR 12.030. See related items C.1–C.8 and C.10–C.14. 10. 12.100—BASIC MEDIATION CURRICULUM Amend the basic mediation training curriculum. See related items C.1–C.9 and C.11–C.1…

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.

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 18

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 18 · 2026

A-17 At the spring meeting on April 29, 2026, the committee adopted by consensus a minor modification to streamline the amendment, which is reflected in the final approved version below. AMENDMENT 5.100 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED ORDERS OR JUDGMENTS (1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this rule, any proposed judgment or proposed order submitted to the court for signature must be: (a) Served on each attorney not less than three days prior to submission to the court, or (b) Accompanied by a stipulation by each attorney that no objection exists as to the judgment or order, or (c) Served on a self-represented party not less than seven days prior to submission to the court and be accompanied by notice of the time period to object. (2) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this rule, any proposed judgment or order submitted to the court must include, following the space for judicial signature, a dated and signed certificate that describes: (a) The manner and date of compliance with any…

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.

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.

PJO 26-14 Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings — physical PDF page 2

PJO 26-14 Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings · physical PDF page 2 ·

2. Use of AI tools does not modify, diminish, or shift the obligations imposed by ORCP 17. Every filed document must be signed by an attorney of record or, if unrepresented, the party, and that signature certifies compliance with ORCP 17(C). 3. Because AI systems may generate inaccurate case law, incorrect quotations, or misapplied authority, the court requires: e All citations must correspond to actual, valid legal authorities. ¢ Quoted material must be checked against the source. e Parties must not rely on Al-generated summaries, headnotes, or paraphrases without confirming accuracy. 4. The court may require parties to produce copies of any cited authority. 5. The court may strike filings containing fabricated authority or significant inaccuracies and may impose sanctions under ORCP 17(D). 6. This Order applies to all filings, including motions, memoranda, pleadings, letters submitted to the court, and proposed orders. 7. This Order is effective immediately and remains in force until…

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.

CJO 2026-028 — Approving Out-of-Cycle Amendments of UTCR 21.040 and 21.070 to Authorize Electronic Submission of Documents Up to 50 MB in Size ↗

Search this stored order

machine_extracted_unreviewed

Chief Justice amendment order effective 2026-07-22; original amendment document, not consolidated rule text

PJO 26-14 Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Court Filings ↗

Search this stored order

machine_ocr_unreviewed

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.