Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.751 (2026)

Temporary emergency jurisdiction

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

      109.751 Temporary emergency jurisdiction. (1) A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse.

      (2) If there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under ORS 109.701 to 109.834 and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747, a child custody determination made under this section remains in effect until an order is obtained from a court of a state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747. If a child custody proceeding has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747, a child custody determination made under this section becomes a final determination if the determination so provides and this state becomes the home state of the child.

      (3) If there is a previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under ORS 109.701 to 109.834, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747, any order issued by a court of this state under this section must specify in the order a period that the court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an order from the state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747. The order issued in this state remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the period specified or the period expires.

      (4) A court of this state that has been asked to make a child custody determination under this section, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of a state having jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747, shall immediately communicate with the other court. A court of this state that is exercising jurisdiction under ORS 109.741 to 109.747, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of another state under a statute similar to this section, shall immediately communicate with the court of that state to resolve the emergency, protect the safety of the parties and the child and determine a period for the duration of the temporary order. [1999 c.649 §16]

 

      Note: See note under 109.701.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021). · cites it 49× “These juvenile dependency cases raise the issue of the scope of a juvenile court’s temporary emergency jurisdic- tion under ORS 109.751, which is part of Oregon’s enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 303 Or. App. 324 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 62× “Even if it lacks initial-custody jurisdiction, a court may make a custody determination, including an initial custody determination, if it has temporary emergency juris- diction under ORS 109.751. See ORS 109.741(1) (prefacing the requirements for initial-custody jurisdiction…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. P. D., 368 Or. 627 (Or. 2021). · cites it 22× “II, the court became concerned that these cases might have become moot, because the juvenile court had terminated its jurisdic- tion and the wardships during the pendency of the appeal.”
State v. L. P. L. O., 381 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 10× “Because, as discussed above, the state has focused on the wrong question when determining whether an emergency exists necessitating court action to protect a child, as provided in ORS 109.751, we reject the state’s argument.”
Matter of Marriage of Medill, 40 P.3d 1087 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 10× “744, provides: "(1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 109.751, a court of this state that has made a child custody determination consistent with ORS 109.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. P., 537 P.3d 593 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “744(1) (“Except as otherwise pro- vided in ORS 109.751, a court of this state that has made a child custody determination consistent with ORS 109.”
Menten & Deatherage, 461 P.3d 1075 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “741(1), nor did court take temporary emergency jurisdiction under ORS 109.751). We have noted that subject matter jurisdiction—the authority to exercise judicial power in a given subject area or dispute—is distinct from a court’s exercise of its authority within a given subject…”
Campbell v. Tardio, 323 P.3d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “That statute provides: “(1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 109.751, a court of this state that has made a child custody determination consistent with ORS 109.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. R. (In re G. I. R.), 447 P.3d 74 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “741(1)(d) because no other state had jurisdiction. In particular, DHS contends that Virginia was not child's home state.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. T.F. (In re M.L.F.), 425 P.3d 480 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 6× “Nevertheless, DHS claims that the juvenile court had "temporary emergency jurisdiction" under ORS 109.751 and, because nothing has happened in the meantime to alter that status, Oregon courts have subject matter jurisdiction in this matter.”
Snow v. Snow, 74 P.3d 1137 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “747 provides: “Except as otherwise provided in ORS 109.751,[ 3 ] a court of this state may not modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state unless a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under ORS 109.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. A. G., 344 Or. App. 511 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “751 [temporary emergency custody], a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: “(a) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commence- ment of the proceeding, or was the home state of the child within six…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.751(1) — 11 cases
State v. L. P. L. O., 381 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Because, as discussed above, the state has focused on the wrong question when determining whether an emergency exists necessitating court action to protect a child, as provided in ORS 109.751, we reject the state’s argument.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 303 Or. App. 324 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Even if it lacks initial-custody jurisdiction, a court may make a custody determination, including an initial custody determination, if it has temporary emergency juris- diction under ORS 109.751. See ORS 109.741(1) (prefacing the requirements for initial-custody jurisdiction…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021). “These juvenile dependency cases raise the issue of the scope of a juvenile court’s temporary emergency jurisdic- tion under ORS 109.751, which is part of Oregon’s enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. P. D., 368 Or. 627 (Or. 2021). “II, the court became concerned that these cases might have become moot, because the juvenile court had terminated its jurisdic- tion and the wardships during the pendency of the appeal.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. P., 537 P.3d 593 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “744(1) (“Except as otherwise pro- vided in ORS 109.751, a court of this state that has made a child custody determination consistent with ORS 109.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.751(2) — 3 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021). “These juvenile dependency cases raise the issue of the scope of a juvenile court’s temporary emergency jurisdic- tion under ORS 109.751, which is part of Oregon’s enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 303 Or. App. 324 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Even if it lacks initial-custody jurisdiction, a court may make a custody determination, including an initial custody determination, if it has temporary emergency juris- diction under ORS 109.751. See ORS 109.741(1) (prefacing the requirements for initial-custody jurisdiction…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. P. D., 368 Or. 627 (Or. 2021). “II, the court became concerned that these cases might have become moot, because the juvenile court had terminated its jurisdic- tion and the wardships during the pendency of the appeal.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.751(3) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 303 Or. App. 324 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Even if it lacks initial-custody jurisdiction, a court may make a custody determination, including an initial custody determination, if it has temporary emergency juris- diction under ORS 109.751. See ORS 109.741(1) (prefacing the requirements for initial-custody jurisdiction…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021). “These juvenile dependency cases raise the issue of the scope of a juvenile court’s temporary emergency jurisdic- tion under ORS 109.751, which is part of Oregon’s enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.751(4) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021). “These juvenile dependency cases raise the issue of the scope of a juvenile court’s temporary emergency jurisdic- tion under ORS 109.751, which is part of Oregon’s enactment of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA).”
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.