108.110
Petition for support of spouse and children; rules. (1) Any married person may apply
to the circuit court of the county in which the married person resides or in
which the spouse may be found for an order upon the spouse to provide for
support of the married person or for the support of minor children and children
attending school, or both, and, if the married person initiating the action for
support is a woman who is pregnant, her unborn child, or both, if her spouse is
the natural father of such children, children attending school or unborn child
or if her spouse is the adoptive parent of such children or children attending
school. The married person initiating the action for support may apply for the
order by filing in such county a petition setting forth the facts and
circumstances upon which the married person relies for such order. If satisfied
that a just cause exists, the court shall direct that the married person’s
spouse appear at a time set by the court to show cause why an order of support
should not be entered in the matter. The provisions of ORS 107.108 apply to an
order entered under this section for the support of a child attending school.
(2) As used in
this section, “child attending school” has the meaning given that term in ORS
107.108.
(3) The
petitioner shall state in the petition, to the extent known:
(a) Whether there
is pending in this state or any other jurisdiction any type of support
proceeding involving children of the marriage, including a proceeding brought
under ORS 25.501 to 25.556, 107.085, 109.100, 125.025 or 419B.400 or ORS
chapter 110; and
(b) Whether there
exists in this state or any other jurisdiction a support order, as defined in
ORS 110.503, involving children of the marriage.
(4) The
petitioner shall include with the petition a certificate regarding any pending
support proceeding and any existing support order. The petitioner shall use a
certificate that is in a form established by court rule and include information
required by court rule and subsection (3) of this section.
(5) The
provisions of this section apply equally regardless of which spouse is making application
for a support order.
(6) In any
proceeding under this section, the obligee, as that person is defined in ORS
110.503, is a party to the proceeding. [Amended by 1963 c.497 §1; 1973 c.827 §12d;
1975 c.140 §1; 1975 c.458 §13; 1979 c.90 §1; 1981 c.669 §2; 1993 c.596 §18;
1995 c.343 §23; 1997 c.704 §54; 2001 c.334 §7; 2003 c.73 §53a; 2003 c.116 §7;
2005 c.560 §16; 2015 c.298 §92; 2015 c.629 §24; 2021 c.597 §61]
Notes of Decisions
In Re the Marriage of Crocker, 22 P.3d 759 (Or. 2001).
· cites it 13× “For example, ORS 108.110 provides: ‘(1) Any married person * * * may apply to the circuit court * * * for the support of minor children and children attending school.”
Matter of Marriage of Crocker, 971 P.2d 469 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 6× “3 Moreover, *657 the state suggests that ORS 108.110 could be construed to authorize courts to require married parents of children attending school to support their children.”
Burnette v. Wahl, 588 P.2d 1105 (Or. 1978).
· cites it 2× “040, providing an action against both parents for family necessities; ORS 108.110 et seq., which allow a petition for the support of children to be brought against a parent by the other parent or a state agency for the support of the children; ORS ch.”
In Re the Dissolution of the Marriage of Grove, 571 P.2d 477 (Or. 1977).
“12a This holding, of course, does not apply to a case in which there is either a valid property settlement contract or a valid prenuptial contract which provides for automatic termination of spousal support upon remarriage of the supported spouse.”
Matter of Marriage of Pointer, 829 P.2d 1016 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “510, or a proceeding under ORS 108.110, 109.100, 109.103, 109.125 or 419.”
State of Oregon v. Richards, 45 B.R. 811 (D. Or. 1984).
“Richard’s rights to receive support (see ORS 108.110, 109.010), is a technical distinction that does not effect the nondischargeability of the debt.”
In re the Marriage of Wilson, 660 P.2d 188 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
“Although strict adherence to traditional civil burdens of proof do not necessarily serve the needs of equity in domestic relations proceedings, shifting the burden of establishing the circumstances and the effect of the new marriage will more likely insure that the court is…”
Towry v. Kiser, 55 P.3d 509 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
“121(l)(b) are actions *110 for child or spousal support (ORS 108.110), actions for support of a child (ORS 109.”
In re the Marriage of Brune, 634 P.2d 484 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
“See ORS 108.110. In these circumstances, which we find to be changed very substantially since the original decree, the proper course is to terminate spousal support.”
In re the Marriage of Vasconcellos, 671 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
“” In Wilson and Wilson, 62 Or App 201, 205 , 660 P2d 188 (1983), we held that remarriage of a dependent spouse is a circumstance justifying modification, absent circumstances militating against modification in the light of this public policy and the statutory obligation of…”
In re the Marriage of McGinley, 19 P.3d 954 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“155; ORS 108.110. The complete statutory scheme therefore distinguishes between parents who are married to and living with the parents of the children who are attending school and those who are not.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 108.110(2) — 1 case
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.