Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102

Parenting plan; content

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      107.102 Parenting plan; content. (1) In any proceeding to establish or modify a judgment providing for parenting time with a child, except for matters filed under ORS 107.700 to 107.735, there shall be developed and filed with the court a parenting plan to be included in the judgment. A parenting plan may be either general or detailed.

      (2) A general parenting plan may include a general outline of how parental responsibilities and parenting time will be shared and may allow the parents to develop a more detailed agreement on an informal basis. However, a general parenting plan must set forth the minimum amount of parenting time and access a noncustodial parent is entitled to have.

      (3) A detailed parenting plan may include, but need not be limited to, provisions relating to:

      (a) Residential schedule;

      (b) Holiday, birthday and vacation planning;

      (c) Weekends, including holidays, and school in-service days preceding or following weekends;

      (d) Decision-making and responsibility;

      (e) Information sharing and access;

      (f) Relocation of parents;

      (g) Telephone access;

      (h) Transportation; and

      (i) Methods for resolving disputes.

      (4) In addition to the provisions listed in subsection (3) of this section, a detailed parenting plan may include one or both of the following requirements:

      (a) That the custodial parent notify the noncustodial parent regarding specified matters concerning the child.

      (b) That the custodial parent provide the noncustodial parent with an opportunity to comment regarding specified matters concerning the child.

      (5)(a) The court shall develop a detailed parenting plan when:

      (A) So requested by either parent; or

      (B) The parent or parents are unable to develop a parenting plan.

      (b) In developing a parenting plan under this subsection, the court may consider only the best interests of the child and the safety of the parties.

      (c) In developing a parenting plan under this subsection, the court may order equal parenting time. If a parent requests that the court order equal parenting time in the parenting plan, the court may deny the request if the court determines, by written findings, that equal parenting time is not in the best interests of the child or endangers the safety of the parties. [1997 c.707 §2; 2019 c.288 §1; 2019 c.289 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: In re the Marriage of Cooksey
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re the Marriage of Cooksey (2005) orctapp · cites it 9× “101 and ORS 107.102, the ability of a parent to relocate is an aspect of a parenting plan, the standard for which is the best interests of the child.”
In Re the Marriage of Fedorov (2009) orctapp · cites it 6× “As we explained in Cooksey and Cooksey, 203 Or App 157, 165 , 125 P3d 57 (2005), “ORS 107.102 provides that, in any proceeding to modify a judgment providing for parenting time, there must be developed and filed with the court a general or detailed parenting plan.”
In re the Marriage of Murray (2017) orctapp · cites it 2× “105(l)(b) *821 provides that “[t]he court shall recognize the value of close contact with both parents” when reviewing a parenting plan that “has been developed as required by ORS 107.”
Sjomeling v. Lasser (2012) orctapp “” For those reasons, and because the children’s relationship with father can be “adequately * * * preserved by the parenting schedule that was orderedt,]” the trial court correctly “ruled that[,] in this high conflict case[,] the multiple benefits that are afforded by [m]other’s…”
Cole v. Wyatt (2005) orctapp “Knapp’s report and opinion were considered significant in this Court’s decision. The doctor testified that even with the test results, if the earlier allegations were true, his opinion would be different.”
M. E. v. Kirk (2025) orctapp “And, because the court developed the parenting time plan considering “the best interests of the child[ren] and the safety of the parties,” ORS 107.102(5)(b), it also did not abuse its discretion in creating the parenting time plan that it awarded to father.”
Matter of Marriage of Compton (2001) orctapp “Father concedes that the disruption in child’s school schedule is not the ideal solution but contends that it is the only arrangement that will provide him with quality parenting time to preserve and further develop his relationship with his child.”
McArthur v. Paradis (2005) orctapp “]” ORS 107.102(4)(b) adds, “In developing a parenting plan * * * the court may consider only the best interests of the child and the safety of the parties.”
Matter of Marriage of Heuberger (1998) orctapp “” ORS 107.102. 2 At oral argument, a question arose as to the applicability of the amended version of ORS 107.”
In Re the Marriage of Maurer (2011) orctapp “’ ORS 107.102(4)(b)[;] Cooksey [and Cooksey], 203 Or App [157,] 172[, 125 P3d 57 (2005)].”
Long and Leduc (2010) orctapp · cites it 3× “3 ORS 107.102 does not specify factors that guide the “best interests” determination with respect to a parenting plan.”
M. E. v. Kirk (2025) orctapp “And, because the court developed the parenting time plan considering “the best interests of the child[ren] and the safety of the parties,” ORS 107.102(5)(b), it also did not abuse its discretion in creating the parenting time plan that it awarded to father.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(1) — 3 cases
In re the Marriage of Murray (2017) orctapp “105(l)(b) *821 provides that “[t]he court shall recognize the value of close contact with both parents” when reviewing a parenting plan that “has been developed as required by ORS 107.”
Long and Leduc (2010) orctapp “3 ORS 107.102 does not specify factors that guide the “best interests” determination with respect to a parenting plan.”
In re the Marriage of Pierce (2013) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(3)(f) — 2 cases
In re the Marriage of Cooksey (2005) orctapp “101 and ORS 107.102, the ability of a parent to relocate is an aspect of a parenting plan, the standard for which is the best interests of the child.”
In Re the Marriage of Fedorov (2009) orctapp “As we explained in Cooksey and Cooksey, 203 Or App 157, 165 , 125 P3d 57 (2005), “ORS 107.102 provides that, in any proceeding to modify a judgment providing for parenting time, there must be developed and filed with the court a general or detailed parenting plan.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(4) — 2 cases
In Re the Marriage of Fedorov (2009) orctapp “As we explained in Cooksey and Cooksey, 203 Or App 157, 165 , 125 P3d 57 (2005), “ORS 107.102 provides that, in any proceeding to modify a judgment providing for parenting time, there must be developed and filed with the court a general or detailed parenting plan.”
In re the Marriage of Cooksey (2005) orctapp “101 and ORS 107.102, the ability of a parent to relocate is an aspect of a parenting plan, the standard for which is the best interests of the child.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(4)(b) — 9 cases
In re the Marriage of Cooksey (2005) orctapp “101 and ORS 107.102, the ability of a parent to relocate is an aspect of a parenting plan, the standard for which is the best interests of the child.”
In Re the Marriage of Fedorov (2009) orctapp “As we explained in Cooksey and Cooksey, 203 Or App 157, 165 , 125 P3d 57 (2005), “ORS 107.102 provides that, in any proceeding to modify a judgment providing for parenting time, there must be developed and filed with the court a general or detailed parenting plan.”
Sjomeling v. Lasser (2012) orctapp “” For those reasons, and because the children’s relationship with father can be “adequately * * * preserved by the parenting schedule that was orderedt,]” the trial court correctly “ruled that[,] in this high conflict case[,] the multiple benefits that are afforded by [m]other’s…”
Cole v. Wyatt (2005) orctapp “Knapp’s report and opinion were considered significant in this Court’s decision. The doctor testified that even with the test results, if the earlier allegations were true, his opinion would be different.”
Matter of Marriage of Compton (2001) orctapp “Father concedes that the disruption in child’s school schedule is not the ideal solution but contends that it is the only arrangement that will provide him with quality parenting time to preserve and further develop his relationship with his child.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(4)(c) — 1 case
In re the Marriage of Cooksey (2005) orctapp “101 and ORS 107.102, the ability of a parent to relocate is an aspect of a parenting plan, the standard for which is the best interests of the child.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(5)(b) — 6 cases
M. E. v. Kirk (2025) orctapp “And, because the court developed the parenting time plan considering “the best interests of the child[ren] and the safety of the parties,” ORS 107.102(5)(b), it also did not abuse its discretion in creating the parenting time plan that it awarded to father.”
M. E. v. Kirk (2025) orctapp “And, because the court developed the parenting time plan considering “the best interests of the child[ren] and the safety of the parties,” ORS 107.102(5)(b), it also did not abuse its discretion in creating the parenting time plan that it awarded to father.”
Sause and Schnitzer (2023) or
Sause and Schnitzer (2023) or
Sause and Schnitzer (2023) or
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.102(5)(c) — 1 case
Mora and Mora (2025) orctapp
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.