Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.475 (2026)

Court to determine duration of separation; modification or vacation of judgment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      107.475 Court to determine duration of separation; modification or vacation of judgment. The court shall determine and fix in its judgment the duration of the separation. At the expiration of such time, the judgment shall have no further effect. However, no rights created or granted in the judgment which have vested shall be affected by its termination. Upon motion of a party and service upon the other party of notice in the manner provided by law for service of summons, the court may renew or extend the duration. When the judgment is for unlimited separation, a party may by motion alleging that the cause for separation no longer exists and after due service of notice upon the other party in the manner provided by law for service of summons, apply for an order modifying or vacating the judgment, subject to the provisions of ORS 107.135. [1973 c.502 §14; 2003 c.576 §128]

 

SUMMARY DISSOLUTION PROCEDURE

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1976–2006 · leading case: In re the Marriage of Patterson, 136 P.3d 1177 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
In re the Marriage of Patterson, 136 P.3d 1177 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “” ORS 107.475 provides that the duration of a separation is to be fixed by the court, and “at the expiration of such time, the judgment shall have no further effect.”
McArthur v. Paradis, 120 P.3d 904 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “Furthermore, we disagree with father that the trial court “understood” mother’s request to “waive” the reporting requirement of ORS 107.475(7). There is no evidence in the record that mother intended to waive any requirement of that statute.”
In re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Dealy, 549 P.2d 1285 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “) ORS 107.475 provides: "The court shall determine and fix in its decree the duration of the separation.”
In re the Marriage of Wagner, 747 P.2d 400 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “455 to ORS 107.475. Husband filed a response, and negotiations between the parties led to the September 4, 1985, entry of a stipulated judgment of unlimited separation.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.475(7) — 1 case
McArthur v. Paradis, 120 P.3d 904 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “Furthermore, we disagree with father that the trial court “understood” mother’s request to “waive” the reporting requirement of ORS 107.475(7). There is no evidence in the record that mother intended to waive any requirement of that statute.”
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.