652.200
Attorney fee in action for wages.
(1) In any action for the collection of any order, check, memorandum or other
instrument of indebtedness referred to in ORS 652.110, if it is shown that the
order, check, memorandum or other instrument of indebtedness was not paid for a
period of 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, after
presentation and demand for the payment thereof, the court shall, upon entering
judgment for the plaintiff, include in the judgment, in addition to the costs
and disbursements otherwise prescribed by statute, a reasonable sum for
attorney fees at trial and on appeal for prosecuting the action, unless it
appears that the employee has willfully violated the contract of employment.
(2) In any action
for the collection of wages, if it is shown that the wages were not paid for a
period of 48 hours, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, after the wages
became due and payable, the court shall, upon entering judgment for the plaintiff,
include in the judgment, in addition to the costs and disbursements otherwise
prescribed by statute, a reasonable sum for attorney fees at trial and on
appeal for prosecuting the action, unless it appears that the employee has
willfully violated the contract of employment or unless the court finds that
the plaintiff’s attorney unreasonably failed to give written notice of the wage
claim to the employer before filing the action. [Amended by 1957 c.242 §2; 1981
c.897 §86; 2001 c.279 §1; 2007 c.546 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Center, Inc. (2020)
or · cites it 74×
“, 281 Or 307, 313 , 574 P2d 1107 (1978) (concluding that the “central purpose” of the wage statutes—including ORS 652.200—is “that of assuring that one who works in a mas- ter and servant relationship, usually with a disparity of eco- nomic power existing between himself and his…”
Johnson v. O'Malley Bros. Corp. (2017)
orctapp · cites it 30×
“” ORS 652.200. But, as we have just observed, that mandatory fee provision does not apply if one of two conditions is present: either the plaintiff has willfully violated his or her employment contract, or, as relevant to this discussion, “the court finds that plaintiff’s…”
Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Ctr., Inc. (2019)
orctapp · cites it 75×
“The arbitrator also awarded plaintiff $6,310 in attorney fees under ORS 652.200(2), which generally entitles a successful plaintiff on a wage claim to "a reasonable sum for attorney fees.”
Wyatt v. Body Imaging, P.C. (1999)
orctapp · cites it 44×
“Thus, in two of our prior cases, we have treated an action for the enforcement of the penalty wage provisions as an "action for the collection of wages" under ORS 652.200, even though the actual earned wages had been paid before the action was commenced.”
Trent v. Connor Enterprises, Inc. (2019)
orctapp · cites it 23×
“The trial court awarded costs, but it denied attorney fees on the basis that plaintiff had acted unreasonably and in bad faith in the litigation and therefore was not entitled to an award under either statute. In denying attorney fees under ORS 652.”
Allen v. County of Jackson (2000)
orctapp · cites it 46×
“" They also allege that they are entitled to attorney fees under ORS 652.200. Plaintiffs moved for summary judgment on this claim.”
Kantor v. Boise Cascade Corp. (1985)
orctapp · cites it 12×
“150 *709 and attorney fees under ORS 652.200(2). 1 The trial court directed a verdict for defendant on that count on the ground that pension benefits are not “wages” under those statutes.”
Jones v. Rod (2018)
orctapp · cites it 10×
“055(4) 3 and ORS 652.200(2). 4 Plaintiff's second claim sought a civil penalty under ORS 652.”
Migis v. Autozone, Inc. (2016)
orctapp · cites it 4×
“The court determined that plaintiff was entitled under ORS 652.200 and ORS 653.055 to more than $2.”
Miller v. CC Meisel Co., Inc. (2002)
orctapp · cites it 5×
“The policy underlying an award for attorney fees under ORS 652.200 is “[t]o aid an employe in the prompt collection of compensation due him and to discourage an employer from using a position of economic superiority as a lever to dissuade an employe from promptly collecting his…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 652.200(1) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 652.200(2) — 51 cases
Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Center, Inc. (2020)
or
“, 281 Or 307, 313 , 574 P2d 1107 (1978) (concluding that the “central purpose” of the wage statutes—including ORS 652.200—is “that of assuring that one who works in a mas- ter and servant relationship, usually with a disparity of eco- nomic power existing between himself and his…”
Johnson v. O'Malley Bros. Corp. (2017)
orctapp
“” ORS 652.200. But, as we have just observed, that mandatory fee provision does not apply if one of two conditions is present: either the plaintiff has willfully violated his or her employment contract, or, as relevant to this discussion, “the court finds that plaintiff’s…”
Mathis v. St. Helens Auto Ctr., Inc. (2019)
orctapp
“The arbitrator also awarded plaintiff $6,310 in attorney fees under ORS 652.200(2), which generally entitles a successful plaintiff on a wage claim to "a reasonable sum for attorney fees.”
Wyatt v. Body Imaging, P.C. (1999)
orctapp
“Thus, in two of our prior cases, we have treated an action for the enforcement of the penalty wage provisions as an "action for the collection of wages" under ORS 652.200, even though the actual earned wages had been paid before the action was commenced.”
Trent v. Connor Enterprises, Inc. (2019)
orctapp
“The trial court awarded costs, but it denied attorney fees on the basis that plaintiff had acted unreasonably and in bad faith in the litigation and therefore was not entitled to an award under either statute. In denying attorney fees under ORS 652.”
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.