107.728 Where
to file petition; contempt proceedings. (1) A petition under ORS 107.710 may be filed in a
county in which:
(a) The
petitioner resides;
(b) The
respondent resides; or
(c) The abuse
occurred.
(2) Any contempt
proceedings for violation of a restraining order issued under ORS 107.700 to
107.735 must be conducted by the court that issued the order, or by the circuit
court for a county in which a violation of the restraining order occurs. If
contempt proceedings are initiated in the circuit court for a county in which a
violation of the restraining order occurs, the person initiating the contempt
proceedings shall file with the court a copy of the restraining order,
certified by the clerk of the court that issued the order. Upon filing of the
certified copy of the restraining order, the court shall enforce the order as
though that court had issued the order. [2003 c.289 §2; 2024 c.42 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2006–2025 · leading case:
State v. Lucier, 556 P.3d 4 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Lucier, 556 P.3d 4 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 11× “He acknowl- edges that ORS 107.728 expands that authority in the context of FAPA restraining orders, but he argues that the state failed to fulfill a jurisdictional requirement of that statute—specif- ically, the filing of a certified copy of the restraining order.”
State v. Litscher, 142 P.3d 549 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“” The latter statute defines a “violation” as an offense that is either defined by law as such or one that is punishable by fine, but not by imprisonment.”
State v. Imeri, 342 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 3× “We explained that, by enacting ORS 107.728, the legislature exercised its “power to define the circuit courts’ subject matter jurisdiction, * * * expressly permit[ting] con- tempt proceedings on FAPA restraining orders to occur in both the circuit court of the county that issued…”
State v. Imeri, 342 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 3× “We explained that, by enacting ORS 107.728, the legislature exercised its “power to define the circuit courts’ subject matter jurisdiction, * * * expressly permit[ting] con- tempt proceedings on FAPA restraining orders to occur in both the circuit court of the county that issued…”
State v. Lucier, No. A177419 (Or. Ct. App. July 31, 2024).
· cites it 11× “He acknowl- edges that ORS 107.728 expands that authority in the con- text of FAPA restraining orders, but he argues that the state failed to fulfill a jurisdictional requirement of that statute— specifically, the filing of a certified copy of the restraining order.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.728(2): 2 cases
State v. Imeri, 342 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“We explained that, by enacting ORS 107.728, the legislature exercised its “power to define the circuit courts’ subject matter jurisdiction, * * * expressly permit[ting] con- tempt proceedings on FAPA restraining orders to occur in both the circuit court of the county that issued…”
State v. Imeri, 342 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“We explained that, by enacting ORS 107.728, the legislature exercised its “power to define the circuit courts’ subject matter jurisdiction, * * * expressly permit[ting] con- tempt proceedings on FAPA restraining orders to occur in both the circuit court of the county that issued…”
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.