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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 112.395 (2026)

When estate passes to issue of devisee; anti-lapse; class gifts

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      112.395 When estate passes to issue of devisee; anti-lapse; class gifts. When property is devised to any person who is related by blood or adoption to the testator and who dies before the testator leaving lineal descendants, the descendants take by representation the property the devisee would have taken if the devisee had survived the testator, unless otherwise provided in the will of the testator. Unless otherwise provided in the will of the testator, one who would have been a devisee under a class gift if the person had survived the testator is treated as a devisee for purposes of this section if death occurred after execution of the will. [1969 c.591 §53; 1973 c.506 §15]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1977–2007 · leading case: Fleenor v. Williamson, 17 P.3d 520 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fleenor v. Williamson, 17 P.3d 520 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “See also ORS 112.395. 4 By February 1999, Daryl was aware of the disclaimer’s true legal effect.”
Schaad v. Lorenz, 688 P.2d 1372 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “ORS 112.395.” That is also not correct. In the first place, under Oregon Laws 1973, chapter 506, section 43(1), the version of ORS 112.”
Ruotolo v. Tietjen, 890 A.2d 166 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006). “52 (B) (West 2005) (“[ujnless a contrary intention is manifested in the will”); Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 112.395 (West 1990) (“[ujnless otherwise provided in the will of the testator”); R.”
Schaad v. Lorenz, 688 P.2d 1342 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “ORS 112.395." That is also not correct. In the first place, under Oregon Laws 1973, chapter 506, section 43(1), the version of ORS 112.”
Raymond v. Lillegard, 580 P.2d 1078 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “There are at least four possible interpretations of the testator’s intent based upon the language he chose to use in the holographic will: (1) Testator, unaware of the anti-lapse statute, ORS 112.395, 1 intended that the residue of his estate be divided equally "between our two…”
Est. of McGee v. Dep't of Revenue, 7 Or. Tax 288 (Or. T.C. 1977). · cites it 2× “Withers’ will indicates the testator’s intent that, upon Ethel’s death, the interest should go to her son, a situation described by the plaintiff as a "lapsed legacy,” citing ORS 112.395. Plaintiff argues that this intention of the testator is shown by his omission of the name…”
Schmidt v. First Nat'l Bank, 570 P.2d 981 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “400, enacted as Oregon Laws 1973, ch 506, § 17, provides: "Except as provided in ORS 112.395: "(1) If a devise other than a residuary devise fails for any reason, it becomes a part of the residue.”
Roley v. Sammons, 170 P.3d 1067 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “ORS 112.395 provides, in part: “When property is devised to any person who is related by blood or adoption to the testator and who dies before the testator leaving lineal descendants, the descendants take by representation the property the devisee would have taken if the devisee…”
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.