Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.350 (2026)

Judgment of adoption or readoption

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

      109.350 Judgment of adoption or readoption. (1) If, upon a petition for adoption or readoption duly presented and consented to, the court is satisfied as to the identity and relations of the persons, that the petitioner is of sufficient ability to bring up the child and furnish suitable nurture and education, having reference to the degree and condition of the parents, and that it is fit and proper that such adoption or readoption be effected, a judgment shall be made setting forth the facts, and ordering that from the date of the judgment the child, to all legal intents and purposes, is the child of the petitioner.

      (2)(a) A judgment entered under this section must include:

      (A) A finding that the petitioner complied with the inquiry requirements under ORS 419B.636 (2) to determine whether there is reason to know that the child is an Indian child; and

      (B) A finding that the child is or is not an Indian child.

      (b) In an adoption or readoption of an Indian child, the judgment must include:

      (A) The birth name and birthdate of the Indian child, the Indian child’s tribal affiliation and the name of the Indian child after adoption;

      (B) The names and addresses of the biological parents;

      (C) The names and addresses of the adoptive parents;

      (D) The name and contact information for any agency having files or information relating to the adoption;

      (E) Any information relating to tribal membership or eligibility for tribal membership of the Indian child;

      (F) The determination regarding the Indian child’s residence, domicile and tribal wardship status as required under ORS 419B.621;

      (G) A finding that the petitioner complied with the notice requirements under ORS 419B.639;

      (H) If an agency consented to the adoption in loco parentis and the Indian child’s tribe has entered into an agreement described in ORS 419B.529 (1)(c)(B), the terms of the agreement; and

      (I)(i) A finding that the adoptive placement complies with the placement preferences under ORS 419B.654; or

      (ii) If the placement does not comply with the placement preferences under ORS 419B.654 (2), a finding upon the petitioner’s motion under ORS 419B.654 (3) that good cause exists for placement contrary to the placement preferences.

      (c) For each of the findings or determinations under this subsection, the court must provide a description of the facts upon which the finding or determination is based.

      (d) Upon entry of the judgment of adoption of an Indian child, the state court shall provide to the United States Secretary of the Interior copies of the judgment entered under this section and any document signed by a consenting parent requesting anonymity. [Amended by 1959 c.430 §4; 1983 c.302 §3; 2003 c.576 §152; 2015 c.511 §12; 2021 c.398 §36]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Quinn v. Walters, 881 P.2d 795 (Or. 1994).
Quinn v. Walters, 881 P.2d 795 (Or. 1994). · cites it 7× “ORS 109.350 provides in part that “[i]f, upon a petition for adoption * * * the court is satisfied * * * that, if applicable, the requirements of [ICWA] have been met, * * * a decree shall be made.”
A. M. v. N. E. D., 400 P.3d 1036 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “The trial court still must determine whether to grant the petition for adoption under the standards set forth in ORS 109.350 2 before *39 it can render a concluding decision on petitioners’ “request for relief’ in this proceeding—that is, the adoption of A, the attendant…”
Quinn v. Walters, 845 P.2d 206 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “ORS 109.350. The Quinns cross-assign as error the admission in evidence of an affidavit of the Registrar of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.”
Matter of D., 547 P.2d 175 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “" ORS 109.350. [5] Although a proceeding initiated in accordance with the terms of ORS 109.”
Strome v. Strome, 60 P.3d 1158 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “See ORS 109.350. [7] If visitation is unduly restrictive in the future, the court has authority to award appropriate visitation under current ORS 109.”
State Ex Rel. State Off. for Servs. to Child. & Families v. Mitchell, 49 P.3d 838 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “) Finally, under ORS 109.350, the court's role is to determine "the identity and relations of the persons, that the petitioner is of sufficient ability to bring up the child and furnish suitable nurture and education, having reference to the degree and condition of the parents,…”
F. v. C., 547 P.2d 175 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “” ORS 109.350. Although a proceeding initiated in accordance with the terms of ORS 109.”
In the Matter of Marriage of O'donnell-Lamont & Lamont, 56 P.3d 929 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “See ORS 109.350. 5 In both Sleeper and the companion case of Moore and Moore, 328 Or 513 , 982 P2d 1131 (1999), the issue arose in dissolution actions in which the husband sought custody.”
Rogers v. Dep't of Revenue, 587 P.2d 91 (Or. 1978). · cites it 2× “” ORS 109.350. "After the expiration of one year from the entry of a decree of adoption in this state the validity of the *413 adoption shall be binding on all persons, and it shall be conclusively presumed * * * that the child became the lawful child of the adoptive parents or…”
Aultman v. McCracken, 799 P.2d 1148 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “It is an adoption case under ORS 109.350. We conclude that the adoption petition should be granted.”
State Ex Rel. Torres v. Mason, 848 P.2d 592 (Or. 1993). “ORS 109.350 states that, “from the date of the decree the child, to all legal intents and purposes, is the child of the petitioner.”
J. W. v. v. J. L. W., 525 P.3d 1237 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “324 states, in relevant part: “(2) Upon hearing, * * * if the court finds that the par- ent has willfully deserted the child or neglected without 6 ORS 109.350 was amended in 2021 in ways that do not affect this appeal.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.350(1) — 5 cases
J. W. v. v. J. L. W., 525 P.3d 1237 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “324 states, in relevant part: “(2) Upon hearing, * * * if the court finds that the par- ent has willfully deserted the child or neglected without 6 ORS 109.350 was amended in 2021 in ways that do not affect this appeal.”
D. S., 534 P.3d 283 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. T. G., 342 Or. App. 548 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. T. G., 342 Or. App. 548 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
D. S. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.350(2) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. T. G., 342 Or. App. 548 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. T. G., 342 Or. App. 548 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
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.