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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 114.355 (2026)

Sale or encumbrance to personal representative voidable; exceptions

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

      114.355 Sale or encumbrance to personal representative voidable; exceptions. (1) Any sale or encumbrance to the personal representative, the spouse, agent or attorney of the personal representative, or any corporation or trust in which the personal representative has more than a one-third beneficial interest, is voidable unless:

      (a) The transaction was consented to by all interested persons affected thereby; or

      (b) The will expressly authorizes the transaction by the personal representative; or

      (c) The transaction was made in compliance with another statute or with a contract or other instrument executed by the decedent.

      (2) The title of a purchaser for value without notice of the circumstances of the transaction with the personal representative is not affected unless the purchaser should have known of the defect in the title of the seller. [1969 c.591 §132]

 

      114.360 [Repealed by 1963 c.287 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2003–2003 · leading case: McPherson v. Dauenhauer, 69 P.3d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McPherson v. Dauenhauer, 69 P.3d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “In that situation, ORS 114.355(1)(b) would not apply because the will would no longer expressly authorize the transaction, and he would have no legal right to specific performance against the estate.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 114.355(1)(b): 1 case
McPherson v. Dauenhauer, 69 P.3d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “In that situation, ORS 114.355(1)(b) would not apply because the will would no longer expressly authorize the transaction, and he would have no legal right to specific performance against the estate.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 114.355(l)(b): 1 case
McPherson v. Dauenhauer, 69 P.3d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “In that situation, ORS 114.355(1)(b) would not apply because the will would no longer expressly authorize the transaction, and he would have no legal right to specific performance against the estate.”
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.