Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.090 (2026)

Interpretation of ORS 109.060 to 109.090

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

      109.090 Interpretation of ORS 109.060 to 109.090. (1) The provisions of ORS 109.060 to 109.090 shall apply to all persons, irrespective of whether they are born before or after August 20, 1957. ORS 109.060 to 109.090 shall not be construed to affect a decree of distribution entered, or any probate proceeding closed, prior to August 20, 1957.

      (2) ORS 109.060 to 109.090 shall be liberally construed, with the view of effectuating their objects, notwithstanding the rule of common law that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed. [1957 c.411 §§5,6; 1983 c.740 §11]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1970–1984 · leading case: Clarkston v. Bridge, 539 P.2d 1094 (Or. 1975).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clarkston v. Bridge, 539 P.2d 1094 (Or. 1975). · cites it 2× “⑧ ORS 109.090,(2) is the current provision which replaced the essentially identical statute cited by the Thom court.”
Thom v. Bailey, 481 P.2d 355 (Or. 1971). · cites it 2× “” ⑮ *584 Similarly, section 6 (now ORS 109.090 (2)), provides : “This Act shall be liberally construed, with the view of effectuating its objects, notwithstanding the rule of common law that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed.”
Sola v. Clostermann, 679 P.2d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “” ORS 109.090, also adopted in 1957, provides that ORS 109.”
Walker v. Sherriff, 468 P.2d 655 (Or. Ct. App. 1970). “” Section 6 of the 1957 Act, codified as ORS 109.090 (2), provides: “This Act shall be liberally construed, with the view of effectuating its objects, notwithstanding the rule of common law that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.090(2): 1 case
Clarkston v. Bridge, 539 P.2d 1094 (Or. 1975). “⑧ ORS 109.090,(2) is the current provision which replaced the essentially identical statute cited by the Thom court.”
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.