419B.305 When
hearing must be held; continuation; priority. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no
later than 60 days after a petition alleging that a child is within the
jurisdiction of the court under ORS 419B.100 has been filed, the court shall
hold a hearing on the petition and enter an order under ORS 419B.325 (1). Upon
written order supported by factual findings of good cause, the court may
continue a petition beyond 60 days.
(2) At the
commencement of the hearing, unless the court has entered an order finding that
the child is an Indian child, the court shall inquire and make a finding,
subject to the procedures under ORS 419B.636 (4), regarding whether there is
reason to know that the child is an Indian child.
(3)(a) If the
child is an Indian child and if the court found under ORS 419B.185 (5)(b)(B)
that protective custody is necessary to prevent imminent physical damage or
harm to the child, no later than 30 days after the petition is filed, the court
shall hold the hearing and enter the order described in subsection (1) of this
section, unless:
(A) The child has
been returned to the child’s parent or Indian custodian;
(B) The court
orders the child to be returned to the child’s parent or Indian custodian;
(C) The court
continues the protective order regarding the child for more than 30 days as
provided in ORS 419B.185 (5)(d); or
(D) The court
grants the child’s parent, Indian custodian or tribe an extension of time to
prepare for participation in the hearing as provided in ORS 419B.639 (5).
(b) The court may
not schedule a hearing on the petition, or enter an order on the petition,
unless the inquiry and notice requirements under ORS 419B.636 (2) and 419B.639
(2) and all relevant timelines have been followed.
(4) No later than
30 days after a petition alleging jurisdiction under ORS 419B.100 is filed, all
parties shall comply with ORS 419B.881.
(5) When a person
denies allegations in the petition, the court shall set the case for a hearing
within the time limits prescribed by subsection (1) of this section. Upon
written order supported by factual findings of good cause, the court may
continue the hearing beyond the 60-day time limit.
(6) Upon
expiration of any continuance granted by this section, the court shall give a
petition filed under ORS 419B.100 that is beyond the time limit imposed by
subsection (1) of this section the highest priority on the court docket. [1997
c.873 §18; 1999 c.859 §9; 2001 c.622 §53; 2020 s.s.1 c.14 §34; 2021 c.398 §57]
Notes of Decisions
Dep't of Human Servs. v. W. A. C., 328 P.3d 769 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Under ORS 419B.305, a court may continue a petition beyond the 60-day period upon written order supported by findings of good cause.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021).
· cites it 2× “” In January 2019, as required under ORS 419B.305, the court conducted a jurisdictional hearing on the depen- dency petition as to M.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. T. L. H. S. (In re J. M. S.), 425 P.3d 775 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“355 (requiring the juvenile court to "make a specific, detailed, written finding of fact to support" certain determinations about a youth who is being waived into circuit court for prosecution as an adult).”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“Generally, within 60 days of a petition that a child should be within the juris- diction of the juvenile court, ORS 419B.305, the court must hold a hearing, receive evidence, find or reject jurisdiction, and determine disposition of the matter, ORS 419B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. R. W., 370 P.3d 543 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“Pursuant to that policy, DHS generally is required to make ‘reasonable efforts’ to make possible a child’s safe return home while the dependency case is pending.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. C. M. H., 486 P.3d 772 (Or. 2021).
“”9 ORS 419B.305(1) (requiring the juvenile court to hold a hearing on a “peti- tion alleging that a child [falls within one of the categories] under ORS 419B.”
State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. N. W., 221 P.3d 174 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “” The court held a hearing on the petition in January 2009, as required by ORS 419B.305. At that hearing, mother’s testimony (in addition to her version of the events leading to DHS intervention) described her then-current living situation.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. F. D., 298 P.3d 653 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“ORS 419B.305(1); ORS 419B.340(1). 2 Specifically, at the dispositional stage, the juvenile court is required to determine *748 “whether the department has made reasonable efforts * * * to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the ward from the home.”
State v. L. P. L. O., 381 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“809 (petition contents); ORS 419B.305 - 419B.310 (hearing on jurisdictional allegations).”
State Ex Rel Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. T. C., 219 P.3d 610 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“The court held a hearing on the petition on October 22 and 24, 2008, as required by ORS 419B.305. At the hearing, father denied that he had an alcohol problem.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.305(1) — 14 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. R. W., 370 P.3d 543 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“Pursuant to that policy, DHS generally is required to make ‘reasonable efforts’ to make possible a child’s safe return home while the dependency case is pending.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. C. M. H., 486 P.3d 772 (Or. 2021).
“”9 ORS 419B.305(1) (requiring the juvenile court to hold a hearing on a “peti- tion alleging that a child [falls within one of the categories] under ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021).
“” In January 2019, as required under ORS 419B.305, the court conducted a jurisdictional hearing on the depen- dency petition as to M.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.305(3) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. W. A. C., 328 P.3d 769 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“Under ORS 419B.305, a court may continue a petition beyond the 60-day period upon written order supported by findings of good cause.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.305(3)(b) — 2 cases
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.