Oregon court rules & publisher orders

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules — physical PDF page 96

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 96 · 2026

A-38 2. 3.170—ASSOCIATION OF OUT -OF-STATE COUNSEL (PRO HAC VICE) Amended out of cycle to increase the pro hac vice application fee. 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 SCO 25-054, effective January 1, 2026. EXPLANATION This proposal was submitted by Myah Kehoe, President of OSB, on behalf of the OSB Board of Governors. It amends UTCR 3.170(6) to increase the pro hac vice application fee from $500 to $750 dollars, effective January 1, 2026. At the fall 2025 meeting, the proponent provided testimony explaining the need for the fee increase as follows. The pro hac vice application fee has not been increased since July 1, 2014, when it was raised to $500. Increasing the fee to $750 reflects inflationary increases and aligns the fee with the current administrative costs associated with processing pro hac vice applications. According to Consumer Price…

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 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 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.

PJO 25-005 In the Matter of Pretrial Release by sheriff or entity supervising the local correctional facility — physical PDF page 3

PJO 25-005 In the Matter of Pretrial Release by sheriff or entity supervising the local correctional facility · physical PDF page 3 ·

f. Any of the following Class B felony - controlled substance offences: 1. Manufacture of hydrocodone within 1,000 feet of a school, as defined in ORS 475.808; 11. Delivery of hydrocodone within 1,000 feet of a school, as defined in ORS 475.812 ; 111. Unlawful delivery of a Schedule Ill controlled substance to a minor, as defined in ORS 475.906(2); iv. Unlawful delivery of fentanyl, as defined in Oregon Laws 2025, chapter 532, section 3(2) (SB 236); v. Causing another person to ingest a controlled substance , as defined in ORS 475.908(1 ); v1. Applying a Schedule Ill controlled substance to the body of a minor, as defined in ORS 475.910(2); vii. Manufacture of methamphetamine, as defined in ORS 475.866; viii. Unlawful manufacture of fentanyl , as defined in Oregon Laws 2025, chapter 532, section 5 (SB 236); and ix. Distribution of equipment , solvent, reagent, or precursor substance with the intent to facilitate manufacture of controlled substance , as defined in ORS 475.962; g. The fo…

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

Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.

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.

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 19

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 19 · 2026

A-18 “b. [ ] I received objections that I could not resolve with a party despite reasonable efforts to do so. I have filed a copy of the objections I received and indicated which objections remain unresolved. “c. [ ] After conferring about objections, [role and name of objecting party] agreed to independently file any remaining objection. “4. [ ] Service is not required pursuant to subsection (3) of this rule, or by {the following }statute, rule, or otherwise{: }. “5. [ ] Each other party previously filed a waiver of appearance. “6. [ ] This is a proposed judgment that includes an award of punitive damages and notice has been served on the Director of the Crime Victims’ Assistance Section as required by subsection (5) of this rule. “7. [ ] Other: _______________________________________.” (3) The requirements of subsection (1) of this rule do not apply to: (a) A proposed order or judgment presented in open court with the parties present; (b) A proposed order or judgment for which servic…

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 97

CJO 2026-021 — Adoption of Amendments to the Uniform Trial Court Rules · physical PDF page 97 · 2026

A-39 adjustment to cover rising pro hac vice processing costs and sustain Legal Services Program funding. Following the fall meeting, no public comments were received. AMENDMENT 3.170 ASSOCIATION OF OUT-OF-STATE COUNSEL (PRO HAC VICE) (1) * * * * * * * * (6) Except as otherwise provided in this rule, for each application under this rule to appear before a court, the applicant must pay to the Bar a fee of [$500]{$750} at the time of submission of information under subsection (2) of this section, including when application is sought to renew an application at the end of a current one-year grant for a case. The fee will not be refundable. * * * * * NOTE: UTCR 3.170 is adopted by the Oregon Supreme Court under ORS 9.241 and may be modified only by order of that court.

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 25-004 in the Matter of Trial Readiness and Timely Conclusion of Criminal Cases — physical PDF page 1

PJO 25-004 in the Matter of Trial Readiness and Timely Conclusion of Criminal Cases · physical PDF page 1 ·

F!'_EO IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREG'°"01.J.l~ ,[' , Y .. EGnt; In the Matter of Trial Readiness and Timely Conclusion of Criminal Cases ) ) ) ) IN AND FOR POLK COUNTY Presiding Judge Order 25-004 Order Requir ing Trial Readiness Information & Witness List THE ABOVE MATTER coming before the court, sua sponte , and the court being fully advised , hereby find good cause as described below to review and re-evaluate the current judge and trial assignment practices for criminal cases in Polk County Circuit Court: The court's caseload is steadily increasing even after taking COVID19 restrictions under consideration ; That significant cause for the increase in the caseload is due to matters being assigned and scheduled before a trial judge prematurely; And those matters are often rescheduled due to lack of trial readiness as stated by the attorneys . THE COURT , having reviewed and considered all relevant information , further finds that: The current scheduling and rescheduling p…

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

Machine-extracted PDF text, unreviewed.

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.

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 21-002: In the Matter of Authorizing Waiver or Suspension of Payment Schedule Assessment Fees ↗

Search this stored order

source_link_only_scan_needs_ocr

Retained from official publisher listing. Operative status, amendments, rescissions, and case applicability remain unreviewed.