Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820 (2026)

Support order as insurable interest; order to obtain, renew or continue insurance; right of beneficiary to purchase insurance or pay premiums; attorney fees and costs; modification of judgment

✓ current as of May 2026

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

107.820 Support order as insurable interest; order to obtain, renew or continue insurance; right of beneficiary to purchase insurance or pay premiums; attorney fees and costs; modification of judgment. A court order for the payment of spousal or child support whether issued prior to, on or following November 1, 1981, constitutes an insurable interest in the party awarded the right to receive the support. In any case of marital annulment, dissolution or separation, or for support of a child under ORS chapter 25, 107, 108, 109 or 110 or ORS 419B.400, the issue of life insurance shall be determined as follows:

(1) When the judgment creates an obligation of spousal or child support or awards a share of a pension or retirement plan, the judgment may also require that the obligated party maintain any existing insurance policies on the life of the obligated spouse and in which the dependent spouse is named as beneficiary. The judgment may require that the policies be maintained until the obligation is fulfilled. The premiums may be paid by the obligated spouse, and the court may consider the cost of premiums when determining the obligation. Any life insurance policies on the life of the obligated spouse owned by parties outside of the marriage or purchased and held for purposes clearly outside the marriage relationship are exempt from this subsection.

(2) If the party ordered to pay support or a share of a pension or retirement plan has no life insurance policy naming as beneficiary the party ordered to receive either support or a share of a pension or retirement plan, or if an existing policy is inadequate to cover the obligation, the court in a judgment may order that the party ordered to pay shall purchase a life insurance policy naming as beneficiary the party ordered to receive the support or a share of a pension or retirement plan and that the obligated party shall pay premiums on the policy and keep the policy in force until the obligation ends. The obligated spouse has the option of obtaining a nonreducing term life insurance policy or any other type of policy in lieu of using existing policies.

(3) Additionally, the party awarded the right to receive support or a share of a pension or retirement plan may purchase a life insurance policy on the life of the obligated party. In such case the court shall order the obligated party to undergo a physical examination. All rights of policy ownership, including those regarding the extent of coverage, shall be in the party purchasing the policy under this subsection who shall also be responsible for paying the premiums. The provisions of this subsection may be exercised at the time of annulment, dissolution or separation, or at any later time while the obligation continues.

(4) Upon motion of either party, the court shall order a party to renew a life insurance policy allowed to lapse for any reason during the pendency of the suit.

(5) A party who is the beneficiary of any policy under this section upon which the other party is obligated to pay premiums, is entitled, in the event of default by the paying party, to pay the premiums on the policy and to obtain a supplemental judgment for reimbursement of any money so expended. A default in the payment of premiums by the party obligated by the judgment or order is a contempt of the court.

(6) Life insurance retained or purchased by an obligor under subsection (1) or (2) of this section for the purpose of protecting the support, pension or retirement plan obligation shall not be reduced by loans or any other means of reduction until the obligation has been fulfilled. The obligee or the attorney of the obligee shall cause a certified copy of the judgment to be delivered to the life insurance company or companies. If the obligee or the attorney of the obligee delivers a true copy of the judgment to the life insurance company or companies, identifying the policies involved and requesting such notification under this section, the company or companies shall notify the obligee, as beneficiary of the insurance policy, whenever the policyholder takes any action that will change the beneficiary or reduce the benefits of the policy. Either party may request notification by the insurer when premium payments have not been made. If the obligor is ordered to provide for and maintain life insurance, the obligor shall provide to the obligee a true copy of the policy. The obligor shall also provide to the obligee written notice of any action that will reduce the benefits or change the designation of the beneficiaries under the policy.

(7) An obligor who retains or purchases life insurance under subsection (1) or (2) of this section for the purpose of protecting the obligor’s child support obligations may move the court to modify that part of the judgment requiring the life insurance policy to be maintained:

(a) When the obligor retires;

(b) Once every five years after the date the obligor attains 60 years of age;

(c) If the lowest available life insurance monthly premium for the required life insurance policy costs more than 50 percent of the monthly amount of child support due under the judgment;

(d) If the life insurance benefits that would be received by the life insurance beneficiary would exceed more than twice the amount of the total remaining support payments due under the child support judgment; or

(e) If the obligor has established a trust to ensure that upon the obligor’s death, the beneficiary will receive at least 125 percent of the total amount of child support payments that would have been due between the time of the obligor’s death and the date the child support payments under the judgment are scheduled to terminate.

(8) In a proceeding brought under this section, including a proceeding to enforce the provisions of this section, the court may order a party to pay another party the amount of reasonable attorney fees, costs and expenses incurred by the other party in the proceeding. [1981 c.775 §11; 1983 c.728 §5; 1987 c.885 §4; 1993 c.716 §5; 2003 c.576 §131; 2013 c.127 §1; 2023 c.139 §1]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: In re the Marriage of Mitchell, 353 P.3d 28 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re the Marriage of Mitchell, 353 P.3d 28 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “” ORS 107.820 was amended in 2013, but that amendment does not affect the provision at issue here; therefore, we refer to the current version of the statute.”

Klemp v. Andrach, 335 Or. App. 187 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 6× “106(1)(a)(B) and ORS 107.820. At the hearing, mother argued that father’s job was extremely hazardous and involved a great amount of risk, so the court should order father to main- tain a life insurance policy of $300,000 to sufficiently sup- port the children.”

McIntire Ex Rel. Rivers v. Lang, 254 P.3d 745 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 5× “ORS 107.820 furthers a policy of ensuring that divorced parents provide financial support for their minor children.”

In Re the Marriage of Bailey, 273 P.3d 263 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “See ORS 107.820(1). On appeal, reversed and remanded for entry of judgment (1) awarding wife transitional support of $1,500 and maintenance support of $5,500 for 18 months, so that the total spousal support award for that period will be $7,000 per month; (2) for the next six…”

Boatfield v. Boatfield, 447 P.3d 35 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “ORS 107.820(2) provides: "If the party ordered to pay support or a share of a pension or retirement plan has no life insurance policy naming as beneficiary the party ordered to receive either support or a share of a pension or retirement plan, or if an existing policy is…”

In re Marriage of Pope, 718 P.2d 735 (Or. 1986). “135(1) (a) provides: “(1) The court has the power at any time after a decree of annulment or dissolution of marriage or of separation is granted, upon the motion of either party and after service of notice on the other party in the manner provided by law for service of a…”

Matter of Marriage of Stuart, 813 P.2d 49 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “She argues that ORS 107.820(1) "specifically provides that the custodial *52 spouse should be provided as the beneficiary of any such policy.”

Matter of Marriage of Willey, 963 P.2d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “106 requires a judgment providing for custody to include “[mjaintenance of insurance or other security for support[.”

In re the Marriage of Krutsinger, 914 P.2d 1096 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “” See ORS 107.820 (securing support obligations).”

Bidwell v. Baker, 91 P.3d 793 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “108, including any provisions for health or fife insurance, or for the support of a party or for life insurance under ORS 107.820 or 107.830; “(b) Make an order, after service of notice to the other party, providing for the future custody, support and welfare of minor children…”

In re the Marriage of McKinnon, 300 P.3d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Wife appeals from a supplemental judgment modifying spousal support and relieving husband of the obligation to submit to a physical examination pursuant to ORS 107.820(3), so that wife may purchase insurance on his life.”

In re the Marriage of Simmons, 907 P.2d 1134 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “See ORS 107.820. Accordingly, the amount of the policy is reduced to $20,000.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820(1) — 2 cases

Matter of Marriage of Stuart, 813 P.2d 49 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “She argues that ORS 107.820(1) "specifically provides that the custodial *52 spouse should be provided as the beneficiary of any such policy.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820(2) — 6 cases

In re the Marriage of Mitchell, 353 P.3d 28 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “” ORS 107.820 was amended in 2013, but that amendment does not affect the provision at issue here; therefore, we refer to the current version of the statute.”

Klemp v. Andrach, 335 Or. App. 187 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “106(1)(a)(B) and ORS 107.820. At the hearing, mother argued that father’s job was extremely hazardous and involved a great amount of risk, so the court should order father to main- tain a life insurance policy of $300,000 to sufficiently sup- port the children.”

Matter of Marriage of Willey, 963 P.2d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “106 requires a judgment providing for custody to include “[mjaintenance of insurance or other security for support[.”

Klemp v. Andrach (Or. Ct. App. 2024).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820(3) — 1 case

In re the Marriage of McKinnon, 300 P.3d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “Wife appeals from a supplemental judgment modifying spousal support and relieving husband of the obligation to submit to a physical examination pursuant to ORS 107.820(3), so that wife may purchase insurance on his life.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820(5) — 1 case

McIntire Ex Rel. Rivers v. Lang, 254 P.3d 745 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “ORS 107.820 furthers a policy of ensuring that divorced parents provide financial support for their minor children.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.820(6) — 2 cases

McIntire Ex Rel. Rivers v. Lang, 254 P.3d 745 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “ORS 107.820 furthers a policy of ensuring that divorced parents provide financial support for their minor children.”

Seim v. Soriano, 764 P.2d 591 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

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.