107.036
Doctrines of fault and in pari delicto abolished; evidence and consideration of
fault. (1) The
doctrines of fault and of in pari delicto are abolished in suits for the
annulment or dissolution of a marriage or for separation.
(2) The court
shall not receive evidence of specific acts of misconduct, excepting where
child custody is an issue and such evidence is relevant to that issue, or
excepting at a hearing when the court finds such evidence necessary to prove
irreconcilable differences.
(3) In dividing,
awarding and distributing the real and personal property (or both) of the
parties (or either of them) between the parties, or in making such property or
any of it subject to a trust, and in fixing the amount and duration of the
contribution one party is to make to the support of the other, the court shall
not consider the fault, if any, of either of the parties in causing grounds for
the annulment or dissolution of the marriage or for separation.
(4) Where
satisfactory proof of grounds for the annulment or dissolution of a marriage or
for separation has been made, the court shall render a judgment for the
annulment or dissolution of the marriage or for separation. A judgment of
separation shall state the duration of the separation. [1971 c.280 §10; 1973
c.502 §2; 2003 c.576 §105]
107.040 [Amended by 1965 c.388 §1;
repealed by 1971 c.280 §28]
107.045 [1957 c.444 §1; 1965 c.603 §1;
repealed by 1971 c.280 §28]
Notes of Decisions
In Re the Marriage of Haguewood, 638 P.2d 1135 (Or. 1981).
· cites it 2× “Indeed, it is often difficult to determine which party prevails in a dissolution suit.”
In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Kitson, 523 P.2d 575 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
“105 (1) (c) provides that a dissolution decree can require “the support of a party * * * for such period of time as may be just and equitable for the other party to contribute.”
Bernadette Charles v. Albert Mansfield Charles, 788 F.2d 960 (3rd Cir. 1986).
“1982) ("without regard to which of the parties is in fault”); Or.Rev.Stat. § 107.036(3) (1979) ("The court shall not consider the fault, if any, of either of the parties.”
Hoyt v. Am. Traders, Inc., 725 P.2d 336 (Or. 1986).
“It cannot be questioned that because of the no-fault provisions of ORS 107.036, rare is the dissolution case in which a decree of dissolution is not granted.”
Morgan v. Morgan, 507 P.2d 409 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 2× “Morgan, would be awarded the divorce, while under the new statute, ORS 107.036(4), the court would merely declare the marriage dissolved.”
Cookson v. Cookson, 895 P.2d 345 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“Such evidence is barred by ORS 107.036(2), which provides: “The court shall not receive evidence of specific acts of misconduct, excepting where child custody is an issue and such evidence is relevant to that issue, or excepting at a hearing when the court finds such evidence…”
In Re the Marriage of Berry, 271 P.3d 128 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“025 (describing grounds on which “[a] judgment for the dissolution of a marriage or a permanent or unlimited separation may be rendered”); ORS 107.036(4) (“Where satisfactory proof of grounds for the annulment or dissolution of a marriage or for separation has been made, the…”
In re the Marriage of Lewis, 723 P.2d 1079 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“Husband also argues that the court violated ORS 107.036 when it divided the property of the parties and determined support by considering the “fault” of husband in having an extramarital relationship.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.036(1) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.036(2) — 1 case
Cookson v. Cookson, 895 P.2d 345 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“Such evidence is barred by ORS 107.036(2), which provides: “The court shall not receive evidence of specific acts of misconduct, excepting where child custody is an issue and such evidence is relevant to that issue, or excepting at a hearing when the court finds such evidence…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.036(3) — 2 cases
Bernadette Charles v. Albert Mansfield Charles, 788 F.2d 960 (3rd Cir. 1986).
“1982) ("without regard to which of the parties is in fault”); Or.Rev.Stat. § 107.036(3) (1979) ("The court shall not consider the fault, if any, of either of the parties.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.036(4) — 2 cases
Morgan v. Morgan, 507 P.2d 409 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
“Morgan, would be awarded the divorce, while under the new statute, ORS 107.036(4), the court would merely declare the marriage dissolved.”
In Re the Marriage of Berry, 271 P.3d 128 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“025 (describing grounds on which “[a] judgment for the dissolution of a marriage or a permanent or unlimited separation may be rendered”); ORS 107.036(4) (“Where satisfactory proof of grounds for the annulment or dissolution of a marriage or for separation has been made, the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.