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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.338 (2026)

Exempt and nonexempt public record to be separated

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

      192.338 Exempt and nonexempt public record to be separated. If any public record contains material which is not exempt under ORS 192.345 and 192.355, as well as material which is exempt from disclosure, the public body shall separate the exempt and nonexempt material and make the nonexempt material available for examination. [Formerly 192.505]

 

      Note: 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355 were made a part of 192.311 to 192.478 by legislative action but were not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

 

(Exemptions)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2018–2026 · leading case: City of Portland v. Bartlett, 509 P.3d 99 (Or. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Portland v. Bartlett, 509 P.3d 99 (Or. 2022). · cites it 5× “The public records law took its current form in 1973, see Or Laws 1973, ch 794, § 3, but the statutory policy of disclosure, in the absence of a specific exception, remains as it was in 1862: “Every person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state,…”
City of Portland v. Bartlett, 468 P.3d 980 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 11× “In Oregon, “[e]very person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355.” ORS 192.”
Pamplin Media Grp. v. City of Salem, 429 P.3d 1019 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “314(1), which provides that "[e]very person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355." In a proceeding brought to require a public body to disclose public records, "the…”
Oregon Pub. Broad. v. Dept. of Corr., 350 Or. App. 590 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “314(1) (“Every person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355.”). In light of this policy, “[a]ny exemption from dis- closure under the Public Records Law must be…”
McKinney v. Benton Cnty. (D. Or. 2020). “In Oregon, the public “has a right to inspect any public record” that is not expressly exempt under ORS 192.338, 192.345, and 192.355. ORS 192.”
Monson v. State of Oregon (D. Or. 2024). “314 establishes that “[e]very person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355.” ORS 192.”
Washington Cnty. v. Sippel (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “In his fourth assignment of error, defendant contends that, even assuming that the zip file falls under a conditional exemp- tion, the trial court erred in balancing the public interest against the interest of the public body when it determined that the public interest did not…”
Washington Cnty. v. Sippel (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “In his fourth assignment of error, defendant contends that, even assuming that the zip file falls under a conditional exemp- tion, the trial court erred in balancing the public interest against the interest of the public body when it determined that the public interest did not…”
Damián Antoñio Rodríguez Ybabén v. Nancy Jeanne Cozine-Goldstein, State Court Adm'r, Oregon Jud. Dep't; Joann Marie Hubbard, Dir., Human Resource Servs. Div., Oregon Jud. Dep't; Bryant John Baehr, Dir., Enter. Tech. Servs. Div., Oregon Jud. Dep't; & Lizabeth Birney Torgerson, HR Manager, Human Resource Servs. Div., Oregon Jud. Dep't (D. Or. 2026). “Here, under Oregon law, “[e]very person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355.” ORS 192.”
Oregon Pub. Broad. v. Dept. of Corr., 350 Or. App. 590 (Or. Ct. App. 2026). “314(1) (“Every person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this state, except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.338, 192.345 and 192.355.”). In light of this policy, “[a]ny exemption from disclosure under the Public Records Law must be explicitly…”
Upham v. Hummel, 508 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “324(4)(a) (directing public bodies to base their fee requests on a reasonable cal- culation of the actual cost of processing records requests); ORS 192.338 (directing public bodies to separate exempt from nonexempt records).”
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.