107.425
Investigation of parties in domestic relations suit involving children;
physical, psychological, psychiatric or mental health examinations; parenting
plan services; counsel for children.
(1) In suits or proceedings described in subsection (4) of this section in
which there are minor children involved, the court may cause an investigation
to be made as to the character, family relations, past conduct, earning ability
and financial worth of the parties for the purpose of protecting the children’s
future interest. The court may defer the entry of a general judgment until the
court is satisfied that its judgment in such suit or proceeding will properly
protect the welfare of such children. The investigative findings shall be
offered as and subject to all rules of evidence. Costs of the investigation may
be charged against one or more of the parties or as a cost in the proceedings
but shall not be charged against funds appropriated for public defense
services.
(2) The court, on
its own motion or on the motion of a party, may order an independent physical,
psychological, psychiatric or mental health examination of a party or the
children and may require any party and the children to be interviewed,
evaluated and tested by an expert or panel of experts. The court may also
authorize the expert or panel of experts to interview other persons and to request
other persons to make available to the expert or panel of experts records
deemed by the court or the expert or panel of experts to be relevant to the
evaluation. The court may order the parties to authorize the disclosure of such
records. In the event the parties are unable to stipulate to the selection of
an expert or panel of experts to conduct the examination or evaluation, the
court shall appoint a qualified expert or panel of experts. The court shall
direct one or more of the parties to pay for the examination or evaluation in
the absence of an agreement between the parties as to the responsibility for
payment but shall not direct that the expenses be charged against funds
appropriated for public defense services. If more than one party is directed to
pay, the court may determine the amount that each party will pay based on
financial ability.
(3)(a) In
addition to an investigation, examination or evaluation under subsections (1)
and (2) of this section, the court may appoint an individual or a panel or may
designate a program to assist the court in creating parenting plans or
resolving disputes regarding parenting time and to assist parents in creating
and implementing parenting plans. The services provided to the court and to
parents under this section may include:
(A) Gathering
information;
(B) Monitoring
compliance with court orders;
(C) Providing the
parents, their attorneys, if any, and the court with recommendations for new or
modified parenting time provisions; and
(D) Providing
parents with problem solving, conflict management and parenting time
coordination services or other services approved by the court.
(b) Services
provided under this section may require the provider to possess and utilize
mediation skills, but the services are not comprised exclusively of mediation
services under ORS 107.755 to 107.795. If only mediation services are provided,
the provisions of ORS 107.755 to 107.795 apply.
(c) The court may
order one or more of the parties to pay for services provided under this
subsection, if the parties are unable to agree on their respective
responsibilities for payment. The court may not order that expenses be charged
against funds appropriated for public defense services.
(d) The presiding
judge of each judicial district shall establish qualifications for the
appointment and training of individuals and panels and the designation of
programs under this section. In establishing qualifications, a presiding judge
shall take into consideration any guidelines recommended by the statewide
family law advisory committee.
(4) The
provisions of this section apply when:
(a) A person
files a domestic relations suit, as defined in ORS 107.510;
(b) A motion to
modify an existing judgment in a domestic relations suit is before the court;
(c) A parent of a
child born to a person who is not married initiates a civil proceeding to
determine custody or support under ORS 109.103;
(d) A person
petitions or files a motion for intervention under ORS 109.119;
(e) A person or
the administrator files a petition under ORS 109.125 to establish parentage and
parentage is established; or
(f) A habeas
corpus proceeding is before the court.
(5) Application
of the provisions of subsection (1), (2) or (3) of this section to the
proceedings under subsection (4) of this section does not prevent initiation,
entry or enforcement of an order of support.
(6) The court, on
its own motion or on the motion of a party, may appoint counsel for the
children. However, if requested to do so by one or more of the children, the
court shall appoint counsel for the child or children. A reasonable fee for an
attorney so appointed may be charged against one or more of the parties or as a
cost in the proceedings but shall not be charged against funds appropriated for
public defense services.
(7) Prior to the
entry of an order, the court on its own motion or on the motion of a party may
take testimony from or confer with the child or children of the marriage and
may exclude from the conference the parents and other persons if the court
finds that such action would be likely to be in the best interests of the child
or children. However, the court shall permit an attorney for each party to
attend the conference and question the child, and the conference shall be
reported. [1971 c.280 §3; 1973 c.502 §11; 1981 c.775 §5; 1981 s.s. c.3 §34;
1983 c.369 §1; 1983 c.386 §1; 1989 c.188 §1; 1989 c.1084 §1; 1999 c.569 §4;
2001 c.873 §§6,6a,6c; 2003 c.73 §§51,52; 2003 c.576 §§121,122; 2007 c.454 §12;
2017 c.651 §14]
107.430 [Formerly 107.180; 1963 c.223 §1;
repealed by 1971 c.280 §28]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
21
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case:
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 15× “Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
In Re the Marriage of Boldt, 176 P.3d 388 (Or. 2008).
· cites it 3× “In order to resolve that question, the trial court may choose to determine M’s state of mind utilizing *13 means available to it under the relevant provisions of ORS 107.425. 9 If the trial court finds that M agrees to be circumcised, the court shall enter an order denying…”
Bower v. Bournay-Bower, 15 N.E.3d 745 (Mass. 2014).
· cites it 2× “2-01 (2009); Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425 (2008). In certain circumstances, the role of parent coordinator may be analogous to that of a mediator, in others to that of a master, and still in others, the parent coordinator’s role combines multiple functions.”
Durocher & Durocher, 509 P.3d 682 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 4× “In this case, ORS 107.425 spe- cifically authorized the court to appoint the evaluator to make recommendations for child custody and the parenting plan, and as part of the order appointing the evaluator, the parties were required to contemporaneously provide each other with any…”
In re the Marriage of Cerda, 901 P.2d 263 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 4× “” ORS 107.425(3) provides: “The court, on its own motion or the motion of either party, may appoint counsel for the children.”
McArthur v. Paradis, 120 P.3d 904 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “She points to the language of ORS 107.425(7), which provides: “Prior to the entry of an order, the court on its own motion or on the motion of a party may take testimony from or confer with the child or children of the marriage and may exclude from the conference the parents and…”
In re the Marriage of Cain, 100 P.3d 735 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 2× “ORS 107.425(4). The daughter requested an attorney under ORS 107.”
Jordan v. Jordan, 14 A.3d 1136 (D.C. 2011).
“Stat. § 25-405 (LexisNexis 2010) and Ariz. Fam.”
Wessel v. Wessel, 340 Or. App. 576 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Regarding grandmother’s request for appointment of counsel to represent the children, ORS 107.425(6) con- fers discretionary authority to the trial court to appoint an attorney for children on its own motion or if requested by a 6 Due weight is given to the rights of the legal…”
In re the Marriage of Gwinner, 547 P.2d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 3× “The court ordered an investigation under the authority of ORS 107.425 (1). 2 On August 7,1975 father was awarded "temporary” custody, to continue until June 10, 1976 and at that time, at the request of either party, the matter would be set for "determination of permanent custody.”
Gilbride v. Smith (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 15× “Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
In re the Marriage of Thomason, 23 P.3d 395 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 16× “She argues that ORS 107.425 did not authorize the court to make the appointment.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(1) — 6 cases
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
Durocher & Durocher, 509 P.3d 682 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“In this case, ORS 107.425 spe- cifically authorized the court to appoint the evaluator to make recommendations for child custody and the parenting plan, and as part of the order appointing the evaluator, the parties were required to contemporaneously provide each other with any…”
In re the Marriage of Gwinner, 547 P.2d 151 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
“The court ordered an investigation under the authority of ORS 107.425 (1). 2 On August 7,1975 father was awarded "temporary” custody, to continue until June 10, 1976 and at that time, at the request of either party, the matter would be set for "determination of permanent custody.”
Gilbride v. Smith (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(2) — 3 cases
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
Durocher & Durocher, 509 P.3d 682 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“In this case, ORS 107.425 spe- cifically authorized the court to appoint the evaluator to make recommendations for child custody and the parenting plan, and as part of the order appointing the evaluator, the parties were required to contemporaneously provide each other with any…”
Gilbride v. Smith (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(3) — 2 cases
In re the Marriage of Cerda, 901 P.2d 263 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“” ORS 107.425(3) provides: “The court, on its own motion or the motion of either party, may appoint counsel for the children.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(3)(a) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(3)(a)(C) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(4) — 3 cases
Gilbride v. Smith, 537 P.3d 961 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
Gilbride v. Smith (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Later that month, father filed motions pursuant to ORS 107.425 for a psychological evaluation of mother and for appointment of a custody evaluator or, alternatively, to appoint counsel for A.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(6) — 3 cases
Wessel v. Wessel, 340 Or. App. 576 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Regarding grandmother’s request for appointment of counsel to represent the children, ORS 107.425(6) con- fers discretionary authority to the trial court to appoint an attorney for children on its own motion or if requested by a 6 Due weight is given to the rights of the legal…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.425(7) — 1 case
McArthur v. Paradis, 120 P.3d 904 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“She points to the language of ORS 107.425(7), which provides: “Prior to the entry of an order, the court on its own motion or on the motion of a party may take testimony from or confer with the child or children of the marriage and may exclude from the conference the parents and…”
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.