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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.570 (2026)

Parent or guardian summoned subject to jurisdiction of court; probation contract

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

      419C.570 Parent or guardian summoned subject to jurisdiction of court; probation contract. (1)(a) A parent or legal guardian of an adjudicated youth, if the parent or guardian was served with summons under ORS 419C.300, 419C.303 and 419C.306 prior to the adjudication or at least 10 days prior to disposition, is subject to the jurisdiction of the court for purposes of this section. The court may:

      (A) Order the parent or guardian to assist the court in any reasonable manner in providing appropriate education or counseling for the adjudicated youth; or

      (B) If the court orders probation, require the parent or guardian to enter into a contract with the juvenile department in regard to the supervision and implementation of the adjudicated youth’s probation.

      (b) In all cases in which an adjudicated youth is placed on probation, the juvenile department and the parent or guardian shall develop a plan for supervision of the adjudicated youth. The plan must be reasonably calculated to provide the supervision necessary to prevent further acts of delinquency given the individual circumstances of the adjudicated youth. The court shall review and ratify the plan and make the plan a part of the probation order.

      (2) The court may not revoke an adjudicated youth’s probation solely because of a failure of the adjudicated youth’s parent or guardian to comply with an order or a contract under subsection (1)(a) of this section. [1993 c.33 §253; 1995 c.592 §1; 1999 c.577 §12; 2001 c.485 §1; 2003 c.396 §129; 2021 c.489 §96; 2021 c.597 §23a]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: State v. D. S. H., 339 Or. App. 596 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. D. S. H., 339 Or. App. 596 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “As the state acknowledged at oral argument, the juvenile court’s “file and the original orders don’t include the specific conditions that OYA entered with youth or that OYA specifically imposed on youth.”
State v. D. S. H., 339 Or. App. 596 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “As the state acknowledged at oral argument, the juvenile court’s “file and the original orders don’t include the specific conditions that OYA entered with youth or that OYA specifically imposed on youth.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419C.570(1)(b) — 2 cases
State v. D. S. H., 339 Or. App. 596 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “As the state acknowledged at oral argument, the juvenile court’s “file and the original orders don’t include the specific conditions that OYA entered with youth or that OYA specifically imposed on youth.”
State v. D. S. H., 339 Or. App. 596 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “As the state acknowledged at oral argument, the juvenile court’s “file and the original orders don’t include the specific conditions that OYA entered with youth or that OYA specifically imposed on youth.”
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.