646.656
Remedies supplementary to existing statutory or common law remedies. The remedies provided in ORS
336.184 and 646.605 to 646.652 are in addition to all other remedies, civil or
criminal, existing at common law or under the laws of this state. [1971 c.744 §21a]
646.660 [Repealed by 1953 c.391 §2]
646.661 [1985 c.694 §1; 2007 c.71 §200;
renumbered 646A.030 in 2007]
646.666 [1985 c.694 §2; renumbered
646A.032 in 2007]
646.670 [Repealed by 1953 c.391 §2]
646.671 [1985 c.694 §3; renumbered
646A.034 in 2007]
646.676 [1985 c.694 §5; renumbered
646A.036 in 2007]
646.680 [Repealed by 1953 c.391 §2]
646.681 [1985 c.694 §4; renumbered
646A.038 in 2007]
646.686 [1985 c.694 §6; 2007 c.71 §201;
renumbered 646A.040 in 2007]
646.690 [Repealed by 1953 c.391 §2]
646.691 [1985 c.694 §7; 2007 c.71 §202;
renumbered 646A.042 in 2007]
646.700 [Repealed by 1953 c.391 §2]
ANTITRUST LAW
Notes of Decisions
State ex rel Rosenblum v. Living Essentials, LLC, 497 P.3d 730 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “605 to ORS 646.656.” The AVC also provided, in paragraph 12, that defendants “shall not make any express or implied claim, statement, or representation in connection with the marketing or adver- tising of [5-HE] Products in the United States, including through the use of an…”
Pearson v. Philip Morris, Inc., 361 P.3d 3 (Or. 2015).
“605 to ORS 646.656. The specific provi- sions under which plaintiffs brought this action are cited and discussed later.”
Raudebaugh v. Action Pest Control, Inc., 650 P.2d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “ORS 646.656 provides that the remedies specified in the Act are in addition to all other civil remedies existing at common law.”
Sherrod v. Holzshuh, 546 P.2d 470 (Or. 1976).
· cites it 2× “” In addition, subsequent to the trial of this case the Oregon legislature amended ORS 16.220 so as to now permit the joinder of a suit and an action.”
Fowler v. Cooley, 245 P.3d 155 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“6 In addition, “ORS 646.656 provides that the remedies specified in the [UTPA] are in addition to all other civil remedies existing at common law.”
Adelsperger v. Elkside Dev. LLC, 373 Or. 621 (Or. 2025).
“989(3)—a pro- vision of the membership campground statutes—allows for the rights of purchasers to be protected through applica- tion of the provisions of the Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA), and that ORS 646.656—a provision of the UTPA— expressly provides that “[t]he…”
Banks v. Martin, 717 P.2d 1192 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“ORS 646.656 provides that the remedies specified in the act are in addition to all other civil remedies existing at common law.”
Keystone Retaining Wall Sys., Inc. v. Westrock, Inc., 792 F. Supp. 1552 (D. Or. 1991).
“Causation of damages is again disposi-tive. A statutory unlawful trade practice claim is available only where an ascertainable loss occurs “as a result ” of an unlawful practice.”
Beals v. Breeden Bros., Inc., 833 P.2d 348 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“605 to ORS 646.656, relating to structural damage to their homes allegedly caused by deposits of expansive clay located beneath the surface of the land.”
Soldo v. Follis, 732 P.2d 72 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
“605 to ORS 646.656, concerning repairs done by defendant on plaintiffs’ automobile.”
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.