109.124
Definitions for ORS 109.124 to 109.171. As used in ORS 109.124 to 109.171, unless the context
requires otherwise:
(1) “Child
attending school” has the meaning given that term in ORS 107.108.
(2) “Child born
out of wedlock” means a child born to an unmarried person or to a married
person by another person who is not the person’s spouse.
(3) “Respondent”
may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following persons:
(a) A child’s
alleged genetic parent;
(b) A child’s
presumed parent;
(c) The person
who gave or will give birth to the child, if the child was conceived by
assisted reproduction under a gestational surrogacy agreement;
(d) The parent
who gave or will give birth to the child;
(e) The child’s
intended parent, if the child was conceived by assisted reproduction, other
than under a gestational surrogacy agreement; or
(f) The duly
appointed and acting guardian of the child or conservator of the child’s
estate. [1979 c.246 §4; 1983 c.762 §1; 1995 c.79 §38; 1995 c.343 §24; 1995
c.514 §18; 1997 c.704 §56; 2005 c.160 §§14,20; 2007 c.454 §3; 2017 c.651 §51;
2025 c.592 §29]
Notes of Decisions
State Ex Rel. Adult & Fam. Servs. Div. v. Bradley, 666 P.2d 249 (Or. 1983).
· cites it 2× “005 et seq, Clarkston v. Bridge, 273 Or 68 , 539 P2d 1094 (1975); a declaratory judgment proceeding, where the plaintiff mother is not the proper plaintiff to bring a filiation proceeding under ORS 109.”
McIntyre v. Crouch, 780 P.2d 239 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “, petitioner appeals a summary judgment that declared that he has no parental rights as to the child that respondent, an unmarried woman, conceived by artificial insemination with petitioner's semen. Respondent contested petitioner's action to be declared the child's father.”
State Ex Rel. Adult & Fam. Servs. Div. v. Stoutt, 644 P.2d 1132 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “Both the child and the state have a substantial interest in seeing that paternity is established in the biological father and that a defendant who is in fact not the biological father should not be decreed to be the father.”
Gleason v. Michlitsch, 728 P.2d 965 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“1 Both the statutes governing filiation actions, ORS 109.124 to ORS 109.175, and the statutes governing name changes,see ORS 33.”
State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Bail, 915 P.2d 439 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “125 or an order or judgment entered pursuant to ORS 109.124 to 109.230 or ORS 416.400 to 416.”
State Ex Rel. Olson v. Renda, 17 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Father appeals from an amended judgment in this consolidated proceeding that includes a filiation action, ORS 109.124 to ORS 109.237, and an action to determine the custody and support of a child, ORS 109.”
Sola v. Clostermann, 679 P.2d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” Instead, ORS 109.124(2) defines the term “child born out of wedlock,” and we will use that phrase.”
Baker v. Munro, 692 P.2d 126 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” ORS 109.124(2). Under that definition of “child born out of wedlock,” mother clearly would have standing.”
Bell, 854 P.2d 479 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“070(4); ORS 109.124 to ORS 109.230; ORS 109.103. Father admitted paternity, and the trial court granted partial summary judgment on that issue.”
In re Leloff, 314 P.3d 711 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 4× “155(4) could be used to award retroactive child support, “this was not a filiation proceeding brought under ORS 109.124 and following” and “ORS 109.155 does not apply.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.124(2) — 4 cases
Sola v. Clostermann, 679 P.2d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” Instead, ORS 109.124(2) defines the term “child born out of wedlock,” and we will use that phrase.”
Baker v. Munro, 692 P.2d 126 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“” ORS 109.124(2). Under that definition of “child born out of wedlock,” mother clearly would have standing.”
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.