419B.116
Intervention; caregiver relationship; rights of limited participation. (1)(a) As used in this section, “caregiver
relationship” means a relationship between a person and a child or ward:
(A) That has
existed:
(i) For the 12
months immediately preceding the initiation of the dependency proceeding;
(ii) For at least
six months during the dependency proceeding; or
(iii) For half of
the child or ward’s life if the child or ward is less than six months of age;
(B) In which the
person had physical custody of the child or ward or resided in the same
household as the child or ward;
(C) In which the
person provided the child or ward on a daily basis with the love, nurturing and
other necessities required to meet the child or ward’s psychological and
physical needs; and
(D) On which the
child depended to meet the child or ward’s needs.
(b) “Caregiver relationship”
does not include a relationship between a child or ward and a person who is the
nonrelated foster parent of the child or ward unless the relationship continued
for a period of at least 12 consecutive months.
(2) A person
asserting that the person has a caregiver relationship with a child or ward may
file a motion for intervention in a juvenile dependency proceeding.
(3) Filing a
motion under subsection (2) of this section is the sole means by which a person
may become a party to a juvenile dependency proceeding as an intervenor. An
order granting intervention under this section is exclusively for juvenile
dependency proceedings and does not confer standing or rights of intervention
in any other action. Intervention is not allowed in proceedings under ORS
419B.500.
(4) A motion for
intervention under subsection (2) of this section must state:
(a) The person’s
relationship to the child or ward and the person’s involvement in the child or
ward’s life;
(b) The reason
that intervention is sought;
(c) How the
person’s intervention is in the best interests of the child or ward;
(d) Why the
existing parties cannot adequately present the case; and
(e) What specific
relief is being sought.
(5)(a) If a party
wishes to oppose a motion for intervention, the party must file a written
objection to the motion stating the grounds for the objection no later than 21
days after the motion is filed. If no written objection is filed as provided in
this paragraph, the court may grant the motion without a hearing. Except as
provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, if a written objection is filed
as provided in this paragraph, the court shall hold a hearing on the motion.
(b) If a motion
for intervention does not state a prima facie case as to the facts that must be
proved under paragraph (c) of this subsection, the court may deny the motion
without a hearing.
(c) If the court
holds a hearing on the motion for intervention, the court may grant the motion
for intervention if the person moving to intervene in the case proves by a
preponderance of the evidence that:
(A) A caregiver
relationship exists between the person and the child or ward;
(B) The
intervention is in the best interests of the child or ward;
(C) The reason
for intervention and the specific relief sought are consistent with the best
interests of the child or ward; and
(D) The existing
parties cannot adequately present the case.
(6) A person
granted intervention is a party to the case and, except as provided in
subsection (11) of this section, may be granted such relief as the court
determines to be appropriate and in the best interests of the child or ward.
(7) A person who
is not a party under ORS 419B.875 or a person who intends to file a motion for
appointment as a community guardian under ORS 419B.371 may seek rights of
limited participation by filing a written motion for limited participation in a
juvenile court proceeding. Except as provided in subsection (9) of this
section, the motion must state:
(a) The reason
that limited participation is being sought;
(b) How the
person’s limited participation is in the best interests of the child or ward;
(c) Why the
parties cannot adequately present the case; and
(d) The specific
rights of limited participation that are being sought.
(8)(a) If a party
wishes to oppose a motion filed under subsection (7) of this section, the party
must file a written objection to the motion stating the grounds for the
objection no later than 21 days after the motion is filed. If no written
objection is filed as provided in this paragraph, the court may grant the
motion without a hearing.
(b) If a motion
seeking rights of limited participation does not state a prima facie case as to
the facts that must be proved under paragraph (c) of this subsection, the court
may deny the motion without a hearing.
(c) If the court
holds a hearing on the motion seeking rights of limited participation, the
court may grant the motion if the person seeking rights of limited
participation proves by a preponderance of the evidence that:
(A) The person’s
limited participation is in the best interests of the child or ward;
(B) The reason
for limited participation and the specific rights sought are consistent with
the best interests of the child or ward; and
(C) The parties
cannot adequately present the case.
(9) The
requirements of subsections (7)(c) and (8)(c)(C) of this section do not apply
to a motion or court order seeking or granting limited participation when the
right of limited participation sought and granted would be for the purpose of
establishing a community guardianship under ORS 419B.371.
(10) If the court
grants a motion under subsection (8) of this section, the court shall specify
in the order the rights of limited participation that are being granted.
(11)(a) At any
time, a person granted intervention or a person granted rights of limited
participation may move to be considered a temporary placement or visitation
resource for the child or ward.
(b) At any time
after a court has determined at a permanency hearing that the permanent plan
for the child or ward should be something other than to return home, a person
granted intervention may move to be considered the permanent placement resource
for the child or ward.
(12) The court
may modify or set aside any order granting intervention or rights of limited
participation as provided in ORS 419B.923. [2001 c.624 §3; 2003 c.14 §226; 2003
c.231 §3; 2003 c.315 §2; 2003 c.396 §35a; 2005 c.449 §2; 2005 c.676 §2; 2009
c.92 §1; 2009 c.182 §1; 2012 c.86 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F., 538 P.3d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 6× “Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 12× “In so doing, the court denied children’s request to order DHS to place them with their paternal great-grandmother, who intervened in the case under ORS 419B.116, concluding that it lacked the authority to direct DHS to make a specific placement.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B., 539 P.3d 754 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 24× “116(5)(c) and when it determined that appel- lants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 19× “116(5)(c) and when it determined that appellants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 12× “ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
State ex rel. Juv. Dep't v. L. V., 182 P.3d 866 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See ORS 419B.116. DHS objected to her intervention, contending that “[petitioner seeks intervention because she wants custody of the child,” which DHS believed would have a negative effect on case planning and would not be in A’s best interests.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 6× “Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. C. C., 343 Or. App. 657 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
““(b) An intervenor who is granted intervention under ORS 419B.116 is a party to a proceeding under ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. C. L. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 5× “In this juvenile dependency proceeding, father appeals orders1 permitting his son’s former foster mother, DM (foster mother), to intervene under ORS 419B.116. Father and the Department of Human Services (DHS) both opposed intervention, but the juvenile court exercised its…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. C. C., 343 Or. App. 657 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
““(b) An intervenor who is granted intervention under ORS 419B.116 is a party to a proceeding under ORS 419B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(1) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(1)(a) — 3 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. S. E., 338 Or. App. 110 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“Among those criteria, the individual must “[m]eet the definition of a relative” or “a person with a caregiver relationship under ORS 419B.116(1).” OAR 413- 070-1010(1), (2).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(1)(a)(A) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(1)(a)(A)(i) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(1)(a)(B) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(11)(a) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“In so doing, the court denied children’s request to order DHS to place them with their paternal great-grandmother, who intervened in the case under ORS 419B.116, concluding that it lacked the authority to direct DHS to make a specific placement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(2) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“In so doing, the court denied children’s request to order DHS to place them with their paternal great-grandmother, who intervened in the case under ORS 419B.116, concluding that it lacked the authority to direct DHS to make a specific placement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(5) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“In so doing, the court denied children’s request to order DHS to place them with their paternal great-grandmother, who intervened in the case under ORS 419B.116, concluding that it lacked the authority to direct DHS to make a specific placement.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(5)(c) — 6 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F., 538 P.3d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B., 539 P.3d 754 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appel- lants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appellants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. A. A., 337 Or. App. 786 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“ORS 419B.116 sets forth a procedure by which a nonparent in a “caregiver relationship” with a child may seek to intervene in a dependency proceeding.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(5)(c)(A) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F., 538 P.3d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(5)(c)(B) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B., 539 P.3d 754 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appel- lants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appellants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(5)(c)(D) — 4 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B., 539 P.3d 754 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appel- lants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F., 538 P.3d 577 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. B. B. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“116(5)(c) and when it determined that appellants failed to prove the requirement that “the existing parties cannot adequately present the case,” ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. F. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“Pursuant to ORS 419B.116, appellants R. F. and M. F. (collectively, the “Fs”) moved to intervene in this juvenile dependency case regarding three-year-old B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(6) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. C. L. (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“In this juvenile dependency proceeding, father appeals orders1 permitting his son’s former foster mother, DM (foster mother), to intervene under ORS 419B.116. Father and the Department of Human Services (DHS) both opposed intervention, but the juvenile court exercised its…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.116(ll)(a) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“In so doing, the court denied children’s request to order DHS to place them with their paternal great-grandmother, who intervened in the case under ORS 419B.116, concluding that it lacked the authority to direct DHS to make a specific placement.”
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.