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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 496.620 (2026)

Nonliability of law enforcement officers

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

      496.620 Nonliability of law enforcement officers. No person authorized to enforce the wildlife laws shall suffer any civil liability for the enforcement or attempted enforcement of any provisions of the wildlife laws or for the exercise or attempted exercise of any of the duties or privileges granted to or imposed by law upon the State Fish and Wildlife Commission or such persons. [Amended by 1971 c.658 §11; 1973 c.723 §20]

 

      496.625 [Amended by 1971 c.658 §12; repealed by 1973 c.723 §130]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1979–2000 · leading case: Dickens v. DeBolt, 602 P.2d 246 (Or. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dickens v. DeBolt, 602 P.2d 246 (Or. 1979). · cites it 15× “" (ORS 496.620). and, "At all times material herein, defendant, a trooper of the Oregon State Police, was performing a discretionary function.”
Franke v. Oregon Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 2 P.3d 921 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 14× “Defendants assert that the trial court erred in denying their motions to dismiss and for directed verdict, which were based on the theory that they were immune from civil liability because their employees and agents were immune pursuant to ORS 496.620 (1991). 2 Alternatively,…”
Dickens v. DeBolt, 602 P.2d 246 (Or. 1979). · cites it 14× “” (ORS 496.620) and, "At all times material herein, defendant, a trooper of the Oregon State Police, was performing a discretionary function.”
Dickens v. DeBolt, 592 P.2d 1082 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 7× “Under this assignment, defendant first contends that he is immune from liability pursuant to ORS 496.620, which provides: "No person authorized to enforce the wildlife laws shall suffer any civil liability for the enforcement or attempted enforcement of any provisions of the…”
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.