Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220 (2026)

Powers and duties

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

180.220 Powers and duties. (1) The Department of Justice shall have:

(a) General control and supervision of all civil actions and legal proceedings in which the State of Oregon may be a party or may be interested.

(b) Full charge and control of all the legal business of all departments, commissions and bureaus of the state, or of any office thereof, which requires the services of an attorney or counsel in order to protect the interests of the state.

(2) No state officer, board, commission, or the head of a department or institution of the state shall employ or be represented by any other counsel or attorney at law.

(3) This section is subject to ORS 825.508. [Amended by 1967 c.178 §3]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1959–2025 · leading case: Frohnmayer v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 660 P.2d 1061 (Or. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Frohnmayer v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 660 P.2d 1061 (Or. 1983). · cites it 15× “The powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Department of Justice and specified state entities, insofar as the state’s legal affairs are concerned, are specifically defined in ORS 180.220 and 180.230. ORS 180.220: “(1) The Department of Justice shall have: “(a) General…”

Chaimov v. Dept. of Admin. Servs., 520 P.3d 406 (Or. 2022). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff argued (among other things) that there could be no attorney-client privilege between a state agency and the Office of Legislative Counsel.”

State Ex Rel. Frohnmayer v. Oregon State Bar, 767 P.2d 893 (Or. 1989). · cites it 6× “The legislative history of the Public Records Law suggests that the two-track scheme for review of disclosure denials was intended to allocate review responsibilities between the Attorney General and district attorneys roughly along their jurisdictional lines.”

Marteeny v. Brown, 517 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “” ORS 180.220. Further, the legislature has entrusted to the Attorney General the responsibility of evaluating whether conflicts of interest exist as a result of the exclusive role of the Department of Justice and, if the Attorney General decides that they do, taking appropriate…”

TVKO v. Howland, 73 P.3d 905 (Or. 2003). · cites it 2× “The Attorney General subsequently brought an action against the Bar seeking a declaratory judgment regarding the Attorney General’s authority under ORS 180.220 5 to give private, ex parte advice to agencies involved in contested cases.”

Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 573 P.2d 283 (Or. 1977). · cites it 3× “Defendant’s sixth assignment of error is, that "[t]he Court erred in allowing the State Agency to appear by private counsel,” contending that the Oregon State Bar is a state agency subject to ORS 180.220, which *706 provides that no state agency shall employ private counsel.”

Johnson v. SAIF Corp., 122 P.3d 66 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “According to the Attorney General, under ORS 180.220, the state Department of Justice — headed by the Attorney General — has the exclusive control of state litigation and no “state officer, board, commission, or the head of a department or institution of the state” is permitted…”

Brown v. Oregon State Bar, 648 P.2d 1289 (Or. 1982). “Plaintiff’s statutory duties Plaintiff contends that he has the right pursuant to ORS 180.220, to give advice to agencies upon request, with specific qualifications.”

Brood v. Davis, 601 P.2d 487 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “ORS 180.220(2) 6 provides that the Attorney General shall represent state officers.”

Johnson v. SAIF Corp., 164 P.3d 278 (Or. 2007). “SAIF, of course, is subject to certain other statutes that apply to state entities.”

Nw. Pub. Commc'ns Council ex rel. Oregon v. Qwest Corp., 877 F. Supp. 2d 1004 (D. Or. 2012). · cites it 2× “In addition, as the Oregon DOJ appears to have already instructed NPCC, 3 Oregon *1016 Revised Statute § 180.220(1) and (2) provide the Oregon DOJ “shall have .”

State Ex Rel. Thornton v. Williams, 336 P.2d 68 (Or. 1959). “They now appear, respectively, in the 1953 revised code as ORS 180.220, 180.240, 180.060 and 180.070 4 .”

Show all 21 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(1) — 4 cases

Frohnmayer v. State Accident Ins. Fund Corp., 660 P.2d 1061 (Or. 1983). “The powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Department of Justice and specified state entities, insofar as the state’s legal affairs are concerned, are specifically defined in ORS 180.220 and 180.230. ORS 180.220: “(1) The Department of Justice shall have: “(a) General…”

Johnson v. SAIF Corp., 164 P.3d 278 (Or. 2007). “SAIF, of course, is subject to certain other statutes that apply to state entities.”

Nw. Pub. Commc'ns Council ex rel. Oregon v. Qwest Corp., 877 F. Supp. 2d 1004 (D. Or. 2012). “In addition, as the Oregon DOJ appears to have already instructed NPCC, 3 Oregon *1016 Revised Statute § 180.220(1) and (2) provide the Oregon DOJ “shall have .”

Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 772 P.2d 1366 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(1)(a) — 1 case

Subasic v. State of Oregon (D. Or. 2025).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(1)(b) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(2) — 4 cases

Marteeny v. Brown, 517 P.3d 343 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “” ORS 180.220. Further, the legislature has entrusted to the Attorney General the responsibility of evaluating whether conflicts of interest exist as a result of the exclusive role of the Department of Justice and, if the Attorney General decides that they do, taking appropriate…”

Brood v. Davis, 601 P.2d 487 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “ORS 180.220(2) 6 provides that the Attorney General shall represent state officers.”

Llewellyn v. Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 850 P.2d 411 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(3) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 180.220(l)(b) — 1 case

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.