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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 114.275 (2026)

Personal representative to proceed without court order; application for relief

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

      114.275 Personal representative to proceed without court order; application for relief. A personal representative shall proceed with the administration, settlement and distribution of the estate without adjudication, order or direction of the court, except as otherwise provided in ORS chapters 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116 and 117. However, a personal representative or any interested person may apply to the court for relief pursuant to ORS 111.095 (4). [1969 c.591 §124; 2021 c.282 §18]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1974–2019 · leading case: Goeddertz v. Parchen, 701 P.2d 781 (Or. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Goeddertz v. Parchen, 701 P.2d 781 (Or. 1985). · cites it 2× “The second order denied the objection on the ground that the first order became "the law of the case" and that the probate court then "was without jurisdiction to hear further objection to the payment of [the allegedly insufficient] claim.”
Helgesson v. Est. of Frank, 521 P.2d 16 (Or. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 6× “ORS 114.275. Included is the authority to sell estate property without prior notice to the heirs, without prior approval from the heirs or without court approval except upon three conditions not relevant in the present case.”
Garcia v. Clark, 455 P.3d 560 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “In June 2017, the personal representative of the testator’s estate filed a petition in the probate court under ORS 114.275 seeking instructions on the construction of the will.”
Matter of Est. of White, 609 P.2d 365 (Or. 1980). “The party paying any such claim or judgment, whether in full or in part, or in an amount agreed upon in compromise, shall not be required to see that the amount paid is applied or apportioned as provided in ORS 30.”
Barker v. Barker, 672 P.2d 370 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “This proceeding was initiated by co-personal representatives of the decedent’s estate seeking instructions from the circuit court pursuant to ORS 114.275 1 regarding the apportionment of inheritance taxes under the decedent’s will and codicil thereto.”
Matter of Est. of White, 599 P.2d 1147 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “Under ORS 114.275, 114.305 and 114.325, the personal representative has authority to conduct a wide variety of transactions, many of which may have major financial consequences to the beneficiaries of the estate, without court approval.”
West v. White, 766 P.2d 383 (Or. 1988). “ORS 114.275. It does not do away with the requirement * * * that there be property in this state upon which probate may operate.”
West v. White, 758 P.2d 424 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “ORS 114.275. It does not do away with the requirement that the court have subject matter jurisdiction, that is, that there be property in this state upon which probate may operate.”
Busch v. Farmington Centers Beaverton, 124 P.3d 1282 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “, ORS 114.275; ORS 114.305; ORS 114.325. Of course, any settlement had to he by Busch in his capacity as personal representative, because only the personal representative of an estate may bring a wrongful death action and settle it.”
Smith v. Bennett, 606 P.2d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “This proceeding was originated by the personal representative of the decedent’s estate seeking instructions from the circuit court pursuant to ORS 114.275 1 as to the interpretation of the following provisions of the will: "III "I give, devise and bequeath unto Cheryl Lynn Smith…”
Thomas v. State ex rel. Senior & Disabled Servs. Div., 878 P.2d 1081 (Or. 1994). “See ORS 114.275 (providing procedure). Nothing in the probate code indicates that the legislature intended to preclude the accrual of interest if the personal representative chooses to pay a claim in installments over time, rather than in a lump sum immediately.”
Thomas v. Senior & Disabled Serv. Div., 878 P.2d 1081 (Or. 1994). “See ORS 114.275 (providing procedure). Nothing in the probate code indicates that the legislature intended to preclude the accrual of interest if the personal representative chooses to pay a claim in installments over time, rather than in a lump sum immediately.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.