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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.237 (2026)

Duration of appointment; compensation

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

      419B.237 Duration of appointment; compensation. (1) The appointment of a guardian ad litem under ORS 419B.231 continues until:

      (a) The court terminates the appointment;

      (b) The juvenile court proceeding is dismissed; or

      (c) The parent’s parental rights are terminated, unless the court continues the appointment.

      (2) A party to the proceeding or the attorney for the parent for whom a guardian ad litem has been appointed may request removal of the guardian ad litem. The court:

      (a) Shall remove the guardian ad litem if the court determines that the parent no longer lacks substantial capacity either to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding or to give direction and assistance to the parent’s attorney on decisions the parent must make in the proceeding; or

      (b) May remove the guardian ad litem on other grounds as the court determines appropriate.

      (3) The Oregon Public Defense Commission shall compensate a guardian ad litem for duties the guardian ad litem performs in the proceeding from funds appropriated to the commission. [2005 c.450 §4; 2023 c.281 §65]

 

419B.239 [1993 c.33 §89; 1993 c.546 §40; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.242 [1993 c.33 §90; 1993 c.546 §41; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.245 [1993 c.33 §91; 2001 c.622 §38; renumbered 419B.872 in 2001]

 

419B.260 [1993 c.546 §43 (enacted in lieu of 1993 c.33 §92); 1997 c.707 §31; 1997 c.873 §12; 1999 c.302 §1; 2001 c.622 §36; renumbered 419B.806 in 2001]

 

419B.265 [1993 c.33 §93; 1993 c.546 §44; 1995 c.273 §21; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.268 [1993 c.33 §94; 1993 c.295 §3; 1993 c.546 §45; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.271 [1993 c.33 §95; 1993 c.295 §4; 1993 c.546 §46; 1995 c.273 §22; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.274 [1993 c.33 §96; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.277 [1993 c.33 §97; 1993 c.546 §47; repealed by 2001 c.622 §57]

 

419B.280 [1993 c.33 §98; renumbered 419B.827 in 2001]

 

419B.282 [1993 c.33 §99; 2001 c.622 §48; renumbered 419B.842 in 2001]

 

419B.285 [1993 c.33 §100; 1993 c.546 §48; 2001 c.622 §41; renumbered 419B.914 in 2001]

 

419B.300 [1993 c.546 §50; 2001 c.622 §40; renumbered 419B.881 in 2001]

 

(Hearings)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2015–2023 · leading case: Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. E. (In re J. R.), 441 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. E. (In re J. R.), 441 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “231 and ORS 419B.237, it is not "obvious" that ORS 419B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. U. L., 380 P.3d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 5× “Critically for our analysis on remand, our basis for concluding that no error was plain was that the juvenile court had not been asked to remove the GAL, and the relevant statute, ORS 419B.237(2), “simply does not support mother’s contention that, in the absence of any ‘request’…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. P., 537 P.3d 593 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “We note that if requested, the juvenile court must evaluate the continuing need for a guardian ad litem for father under ORS 419B.237(2)(a) rather than rely on the past appointment.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. U. L., 347 P.3d 364 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “The court: “(a) Shall remove the guardian ad litem if the court determines that the parent no longer lacks substantial capacity either to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding or to give direction and assistance to the parent’s attorney on decisions the parent…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.237(1) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. E. (In re J. R.), 441 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “231 and ORS 419B.237, it is not "obvious" that ORS 419B.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.237(2) — 3 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. E. (In re J. R.), 441 P.3d 713 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “231 and ORS 419B.237, it is not "obvious" that ORS 419B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. U. L., 380 P.3d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Critically for our analysis on remand, our basis for concluding that no error was plain was that the juvenile court had not been asked to remove the GAL, and the relevant statute, ORS 419B.237(2), “simply does not support mother’s contention that, in the absence of any ‘request’…”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. U. L., 347 P.3d 364 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “The court: “(a) Shall remove the guardian ad litem if the court determines that the parent no longer lacks substantial capacity either to understand the nature and consequences of the proceeding or to give direction and assistance to the parent’s attorney on decisions the parent…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.237(2)(a) — 2 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. P., 537 P.3d 593 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “We note that if requested, the juvenile court must evaluate the continuing need for a guardian ad litem for father under ORS 419B.237(2)(a) rather than rely on the past appointment.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. U. L., 380 P.3d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Critically for our analysis on remand, our basis for concluding that no error was plain was that the juvenile court had not been asked to remove the GAL, and the relevant statute, ORS 419B.237(2), “simply does not support mother’s contention that, in the absence of any ‘request’…”
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.