609.095 Dog as
public nuisance; public nuisance prohibited; complaint. (1) A dog is a public nuisance if
it:
(a) Chases
persons or vehicles on premises other than premises from which the keeper of
the dog may lawfully exclude others;
(b) Damages or
destroys property of persons other than the keeper of the dog;
(c) Scatters
garbage on premises other than premises from which the keeper of the dog may
lawfully exclude others;
(d) Trespasses on
private property of persons other than the keeper of the dog;
(e) Disturbs any
person by frequent or prolonged noises;
(f) Is a female
in heat and running at large; or
(g) Is a
potentially dangerous dog, but is not a dangerous dog as defined in ORS
609.098.
(2) The keeper of
a dog in a county or city that is subject to ORS 609.030 and 609.035 to 609.110
maintains a public nuisance if the dog commits an act described under
subsection (1) of this section. Maintaining a dog that is a public nuisance is
a violation.
(3) A keeper of a
dog maintains a public nuisance if the keeper fails to comply with reasonable
restrictions imposed under ORS 609.990 or if a keeper fails to provide
acceptable proof of compliance to the court on or before the 10th day after
issuance of the order imposing the restrictions. If the court finds the proof
submitted by the keeper unacceptable, the court shall send notice of that
finding to the keeper no later than five days after the proof is received.
(4) Any person
who has cause to believe a keeper is maintaining a dog that is a public
nuisance may complain, either orally or in writing, to the county or city. The
receipt of any complaint is sufficient cause for the county or city to
investigate the matter and determine whether the keeper of the dog is in
violation of subsection (2) or (3) of this section. [1973 c.655 §2; 1977 c.802 §7;
1999 c.658 §8; 1999 c.756 §18; 2001 c.636 §9; 2001 c.926 §15; 2005 c.840 §7;
2011 c.607 §16]
609.097 [1975 c.499 §4; 1999 c.658 §9;
2001 c.636 §10; repealed by 2005 c.840 §9]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case:
Behnke v. Jordan, 550 P.2d 736 (Or. 1976).
Behnke v. Jordan, 550 P.2d 736 (Or. 1976).
· cites it 4× “NOTES [1] ORS 609.095 provides as follows: "A dog is a public nuisance if it: "(1) Bites a person; "(2) Habitually chases vehicles or persons; "(3) Damages or destroys property of persons other than the owner of the dog; "(4) Scatters garbage; "(5) Habitually trespasses on…”
Lockett v. Hill, 51 P.3d 5 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
“Sieckmann, Wesley Delyle; aka Sieckmann, Westley Delyle (A115553) (A115593XA115916) State v. Smith, Jay D. (A110262) State v.”
Lockett v. Hill, 51 P.3d 5 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
“Thus, plaintiffs have directed us to no authority for the proposition that defendant's negligent conduct breached a duty over and above the duty to avoid foreseeable risk, that is, that defendant's negligent conduct interfered with an interest that is protected by something…”
State v. Griffin, 684 P.2d 32 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 5× “990(2) does *202 provide that, if a dog has been repeatedly found to be a public nuisance under ORS 609.095, the court may order such disposition of the animal as the court considers necessary for the safety or health of the public.”
Roach v. Jackson Cnty., 949 P.2d 1227 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
“190 or when a dog is a public nuisance described by ORS 609.095 or 609.150, every chief of police, constable, sheriff or deputy of either, or other police or dog control officer shall impound it or cite the owner or keeper to court or do both.”
State v. Winkelman, 545 P.2d 601 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
“PER CURIAM ORS 609.095(6) reads: "A dog is a public nuisance if it: * * * "(6) Disturbs any person by frequent or prolonged noises * * The sole issue is whether this statute is unconstitutionally vague.”
State v. Kayne, 350 Or. App. 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
“035(8)(c) as a dog that “[w]ithout provocation and while not on premises from which the keeper may lawfully exclude others, inflicts physical injury on or kills livestock or a domestic animal,” after having previously committed an act as a potentially dangerous dog that resulted…”
State v. Garnier, 16 P.3d 1175 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
“Defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that statutory former jeopardy provisions barred the prosecution, because he previously had been cited for maintaining a dog as a nuisance in violation of ORS 609.095, based on the same events. The trial court granted…”
State v. Kayne, 350 Or. App. 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
“035 (8)(c) as a dog that “[w]ithout provocation and while not on premises from which the keeper may lawfully exclude oth- ers, inflicts physical injury on or kills livestock or a domes- tic animal,” after having previously committed an act as a potentially dangerous dog that…”
State v. Girt, 321 Or. App. 534 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“060, and three counts of maintaining a dog that is a public nuisance, ORS 609.095. She pleaded not guilty and the cases were combined for trial.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 609.095(1)(g) — 2 cases
State v. Kayne, 350 Or. App. 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
“035(8)(c) as a dog that “[w]ithout provocation and while not on premises from which the keeper may lawfully exclude others, inflicts physical injury on or kills livestock or a domestic animal,” after having previously committed an act as a potentially dangerous dog that resulted…”
State v. Kayne, 350 Or. App. 641 (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
“035 (8)(c) as a dog that “[w]ithout provocation and while not on premises from which the keeper may lawfully exclude oth- ers, inflicts physical injury on or kills livestock or a domes- tic animal,” after having previously committed an act as a potentially dangerous dog that…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 609.095(1)(h) — 1 case
Lockett v. Hill, 51 P.3d 5 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
“Thus, plaintiffs have directed us to no authority for the proposition that defendant's negligent conduct breached a duty over and above the duty to avoid foreseeable risk, that is, that defendant's negligent conduct interfered with an interest that is protected by something…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 609.095(2) — 1 case
State v. Griffin, 684 P.2d 32 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
“990(2) does *202 provide that, if a dog has been repeatedly found to be a public nuisance under ORS 609.095, the court may order such disposition of the animal as the court considers necessary for the safety or health of the public.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 609.095(6) — 1 case
State v. Winkelman, 545 P.2d 601 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
“PER CURIAM ORS 609.095(6) reads: "A dog is a public nuisance if it: * * * "(6) Disturbs any person by frequent or prolonged noises * * The sole issue is whether this statute is unconstitutionally vague.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 609.095(l)(h) — 1 case
Lockett v. Hill, 51 P.3d 5 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
“Sieckmann, Wesley Delyle; aka Sieckmann, Westley Delyle (A115553) (A115593XA115916) State v. Smith, Jay D. (A110262) State v.”
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.