Or. Rev. Stat. § 543.610

Acquisition of project by state or municipality

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

543.610 Acquisition of project by state or municipality. (1) Upon not less than two years’ notice in writing the state, or any municipality thereof, shall have the right at any time to take over and thereafter to maintain and operate any project constructed under a license pursuant to ORS 543.010 to 543.610, upon payment of just compensation, including such reasonable damages, if any, to valuable, serviceable and dependent property of the holder of the license, not taken over, as may be caused by the severance therefrom of the property taken, and shall assume all contracts entered into by the licensee which are required to have and do have the express approval of the Water Resources Commission. If the sum to be paid cannot be agreed upon by the holder of the license and the municipality or the state, as the case may be, it shall be determined in a proceeding in equity instituted by the state or municipality, as the case may be, in the circuit court of the county in which the major part of the project is located.

(2) There is also expressly reserved to the state, and any municipality thereof, the right to take over all or any part of any project by condemnation proceedings as may be provided by the laws of Oregon or the charter of any such municipality. [Amended by 1983 c.799 §8]

543.620 [Repealed by 1995 c.229 §9]

POWER GENERATION BY DISTRICTS

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Emerald PUD v. PP & L

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Emerald PUD v. PP & L (1986) or · cites it 22× “Emerald People's Utility District (Emerald) filed this action under ORS 543.610 (1981) to take over the hydroelectric project of defendant Pacific Power & Light (PP & L).”

Emerald People's Utility District v. Pacific Power & Light Co. (1985) orctapp · cites it 11× “Emerald People’s Utility District (Emerald) filed this action pursuant to former ORS 543.610 for a judicial determination of the price to be paid for hydroelectric dams, located outside the district, that Emerald proposed to take over from Pacific Power & Light (PP&L) under the…”

Emerald PUD v. PP & L (1985) orctapp · cites it 11× “Emerald People's Utility District (Emerald) filed this action pursuant to former ORS 543.610 for a judicial determination of the price to be paid for hydroelectric dams, located outside the district, that Emerald proposed to take over from Pacific Power & Light (PP & L) under…”

Emerald People's Utility District v. Pacific Power & Light Co. (1986) or · cites it 22× “Emerald People’s Utility District (Emerald) filed this action under ORS 543.610 (1981) to take over the hydroelectric project of defendant Pacific Power & Light (PP&L).”

SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BD. v. Emerald PUD (2005) or “2d 552 . Thus, in deciding whether PUDs are "municipalities" within the meaning of a particular statute, this court examines the specific statutory context at issue.”

Emerald People's Utility District v. Pacificorp (1990) orctapp · cites it 2× “” 2 Plaintiffs made an earlier effort to acquire some of defendant’s facilities pursuant to ORS 543.610. The Supreme Court held in Emerald PUD v.”

PGE v. Alfalfa Solar I, LLC (2023) orctapp “Alfalfa Solar I, LLC “(1) The Public Utility Commission shall establish minimum criteria that a cogeneration facility or small power production facility must meet to qualify as a qual- ifying facility under ORS 543.610, 757.005 and 758.505 to 758.555.”

Springfield Utility Board v. Emerald People's Utility District (2005) or “In Emerald PUD , for example, this court concluded that PUDs do not qualify as *644 “municipalities” within the meaning of ORS 543.610 because the legislature had enacted that statute together with Oregon Laws 1931, chapter 279, 11 which distinguished between municipalities and…”

Pacific Power & Light Co. v. Emerald People's Utility District (1982) orctapp · cites it 2× “” On August 7, 1981, EPUD’s president, Richard Eymann, sent a letter to PPL, which read in its entirety: “This letter serves as the notice required by ORS 543.610 that the Emerald People’s Utility District will take over and thereafter maintain and operate a portion of the…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 543.610(1) — 5 cases

Emerald PUD v. PP & L (1986) or “Emerald People's Utility District (Emerald) filed this action under ORS 543.610 (1981) to take over the hydroelectric project of defendant Pacific Power & Light (PP & L).”

Emerald People's Utility District v. Pacific Power & Light Co. (1985) orctapp “Emerald People’s Utility District (Emerald) filed this action pursuant to former ORS 543.610 for a judicial determination of the price to be paid for hydroelectric dams, located outside the district, that Emerald proposed to take over from Pacific Power & Light (PP&L) under the…”

Emerald PUD v. PP & L (1985) orctapp “Emerald People's Utility District (Emerald) filed this action pursuant to former ORS 543.610 for a judicial determination of the price to be paid for hydroelectric dams, located outside the district, that Emerald proposed to take over from Pacific Power & Light (PP & L) under…”

Emerald People's Utility District v. Pacific Power & Light Co. (1986) or “Emerald People’s Utility District (Emerald) filed this action under ORS 543.610 (1981) to take over the hydroelectric project of defendant Pacific Power & Light (PP&L).”

Pacific Power & Light Co. v. Emerald People's Utility District (1982) orctapp “” On August 7, 1981, EPUD’s president, Richard Eymann, sent a letter to PPL, which read in its entirety: “This letter serves as the notice required by ORS 543.610 that the Emerald People’s Utility District will take over and thereafter maintain and operate a portion of the…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 543.610(2) — 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.