250.044 When
actions challenging constitutionality of state measure must be filed in Marion
County Circuit Court.
(1) An action that challenges the constitutionality of a measure initiated by
the people or referred to the people for a vote must be commenced in the
Circuit Court for Marion County if:
(a) The action is
filed by a plaintiff asserting a claim for relief that challenges the
constitutionality of a state statute or an amendment to the Oregon Constitution
initiated by the people or referred to the people under section 1 (1) to (4),
Article IV of the Oregon Constitution;
(b) The action is
commenced on or after the date that the Secretary of State certifies that the
challenged measure has been adopted by the electors and within 180 days after
the effective date of the measure; and
(c) The action
may not be commenced in the Oregon Tax Court.
(2) An action
under subsection (1) of this section must be within the jurisdiction of circuit
courts and must present a justiciable controversy. The plaintiff in an action
subject to the requirements of this section must serve a copy of the complaint
on the Attorney General.
(3) If an action
subject to the requirements of this section is filed in a court other than the
Circuit Court for Marion County, the other court, on its own motion or the
motion of any party to the action, shall dismiss the action or transfer the
action to the Circuit Court for Marion County.
(4) This section
does not apply to any civil or criminal proceeding in which the
constitutionality of a state statute or provision of the Oregon Constitution is
challenged in a responsive pleading.
(5) If a judgment
in an action subject to the requirements of this section holds that a
challenged measure is invalid in whole or in part, a party to the action may
appeal the judgment only by filing a notice of appeal directly with the Supreme
Court within the time and in the manner specified in ORS chapter 19 for civil
appeals to the Court of Appeals. Any party filing a notice of appeal under this
subsection must note in the notice of appeal that the case is subject to this
subsection.
(6) If a judgment
in an action subject to the requirements of this section holds that a
challenged measure is valid, a party to the action may appeal the judgment by
filing a notice of appeal in the Court of Appeals within the time and in the
manner specified in ORS chapter 19 for civil appeals. Notwithstanding ORS
19.405 (1), the party may move the Court of Appeals to certify the appeal to
the Supreme Court, and the Court of Appeals acting in its sole discretion may
so certify the appeal. If the Court of Appeals certifies the appeal to the
Supreme Court, the Supreme Court shall accept or deny acceptance of the
certification as provided in ORS 19.405 (2). [1997 c.794 §2]
STATE MEASURES
Notes of Decisions
League of Oregon Cities v. State, 56 P.3d 892 (Or. 2002).
· cites it 24× “044(2), which provides, in part: "An action under subsection (1) of this section must be within the jurisdiction of circuit courts and must present a justiciable controversy.”
Swett v. Bradbury, 43 P.3d 1094 (Or. 2002).
· cites it 20× “010 because ORS 250.044 3 provides the exclusive means of bringing a ballot-measure challenge after the voters adopt a measure.”
MacPherson v. Dep't of Admin. Servs., 130 P.3d 308 (Or. 2006).
· cites it 6× “020 and ORS 250.044, 3 seeking to invalidate Measure 37 *122 on various state and federal constitutional grounds.”
Sizemore v. Keisling, 990 P.2d 351 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 4× “A post-election challenge under ORS 250.044 must be filed within 180 days after such certification.”
Beal v. City of Gresham, 998 P.2d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 5× “044(4) provides that the limitations in ORS 250.044 “d[o] not apply to civil or criminal proceedings in which the constitutionality of a state statute or provision of the Oregon Constitution is challenged in a responsive pleading.”
Kerr v. Bradbury, 93 P.3d 841 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“” The state then points to the fact that, in a 1997 statute pertaining to the process by which constitutional challenges may be initiated, ORS 250.044, the legislature declined to include a provision for an award of attorney fees.”
Moore v. Jackson Cnty. Assessor, No. TC-MD 210339N (Or. T.C. July 24, 2024).
“Plaintiff’s claim is not properly before this court and must be dismissed. E. Second Motion For Leave to Amend During the briefing period while the department’s Motion to Dismiss was pending, Plaintiff filed a second motion for leave to amend seeking to add new claims on the…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(1): 4 cases
League of Oregon Cities v. State, 56 P.3d 892 (Or. 2002).
“044(2), which provides, in part: "An action under subsection (1) of this section must be within the jurisdiction of circuit courts and must present a justiciable controversy.”
Swett v. Bradbury, 43 P.3d 1094 (Or. 2002).
“010 because ORS 250.044 3 provides the exclusive means of bringing a ballot-measure challenge after the voters adopt a measure.”
Moore v. Jackson Cnty. Assessor, No. TC-MD 210339N (Or. T.C. July 24, 2024).
“Plaintiff’s claim is not properly before this court and must be dismissed. E. Second Motion For Leave to Amend During the briefing period while the department’s Motion to Dismiss was pending, Plaintiff filed a second motion for leave to amend seeking to add new claims on the…”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(1)(b): 1 case
Beal v. City of Gresham, 998 P.2d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“044(4) provides that the limitations in ORS 250.044 “d[o] not apply to civil or criminal proceedings in which the constitutionality of a state statute or provision of the Oregon Constitution is challenged in a responsive pleading.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(2): 1 case
League of Oregon Cities v. State, 56 P.3d 892 (Or. 2002).
“044(2), which provides, in part: "An action under subsection (1) of this section must be within the jurisdiction of circuit courts and must present a justiciable controversy.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(4): 1 case
Beal v. City of Gresham, 998 P.2d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“044(4) provides that the limitations in ORS 250.044 “d[o] not apply to civil or criminal proceedings in which the constitutionality of a state statute or provision of the Oregon Constitution is challenged in a responsive pleading.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(5): 1 case
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(l)(a): 1 case
Swett v. Bradbury, 43 P.3d 1094 (Or. 2002).
“010 because ORS 250.044 3 provides the exclusive means of bringing a ballot-measure challenge after the voters adopt a measure.”
Or. Rev. Stat. § 250.044(l)(b): 2 cases
Swett v. Bradbury, 43 P.3d 1094 (Or. 2002).
“010 because ORS 250.044 3 provides the exclusive means of bringing a ballot-measure challenge after the voters adopt a measure.”
Sizemore v. Keisling, 990 P.2d 351 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
“A post-election challenge under ORS 250.044 must be filed within 180 days after such certification.”
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.