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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.310 (2026)

Repayment or deduction of benefits due to misrepresentation or receipt of back pay to resolve strike; director discretion; penalty for fraud; time limits on collection; civil action by director; disposition of amounts collected; rules

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

      657.310 Repayment or deduction of benefits due to misrepresentation or receipt of back pay to resolve strike; director discretion; penalty for fraud; time limits on collection; civil action by director; disposition of amounts collected; rules. (1) This section applies to an individual who, according to a decision of the Director of the Employment Department, received any benefits to which the individual is not entitled because the individual:

      (a) Regardless of the individual’s knowledge or intent, made or caused to be made a false statement or misrepresentation of a material fact, or failed to disclose a material fact; or

      (b) Notwithstanding ORS 657.315, received back pay from an employer to resolve a strike.

      (2)(a) An individual described in subsection (1) of this section is liable:

      (A) To repay the amount of the benefits to the director for the Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund; or

      (B) To have the amount of the benefits deducted from any future benefits otherwise payable to the individual under this chapter.

      (b) For purposes of paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection, the director may deduct all or any part of the individual’s future weekly benefits.

      (c) Except as provided in subsection (3)(b) of this section, an overpayment of benefits described in subsection (1) of this section may be collected for any week or weeks within five years following the week in which the decision establishing the erroneous payment became final.

      (d) Notice provided to an individual of the individual’s liability for recovery of benefits under this section must include a description of:

      (A) The basis for the director’s decision that benefits have been overpaid; and

      (B) The consequences of the overpayment, including the methods of recovery of the overpaid amount, with interest and penalties, and the possibility of waiver under ORS 657.317.

      (3)(a) In addition to the liability described in subsection (2) of this section, an individual who has been disqualified for benefits under ORS 657.215 is liable for a penalty imposed at a rate prescribed by the director of at least 15, but not greater than 30, percent of the amount of benefits the individual received to which the individual was not entitled.

      (b) Notwithstanding subsection (2)(c) of this section, overpaid benefits that are subject to the penalty imposed under this subsection may be collected at any time.

      (4) A decision of the director under this section does not authorize the recovery of the amount of any benefits paid to an individual until the decision is final and the decision specifies the week or weeks for which the benefits were paid and:

      (a)(A) That the individual, by reason of the false statement, misrepresentation or nondisclosure, is liable to repay the amount to the Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund; and

      (B) The nature of the false statement, misrepresentation or nondisclosure; or

      (b) That the individual, by reason of the receipt of back pay as described in subsection (1)(b) of this section, is liable to repay the amount to the Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund.

      (5)(a) The director may bring a civil action against an individual to collect any amount subject to recovery and any penalty due under this section.

      (b) Judgment rendered shall bear interest at the rate provided in subsection (6) of this section.

      (6) Interest on any amount liable to be repaid under this section shall be paid and collected at the same time repayment of benefits is made by the individual, at the rate of one percent per month or fraction of a month, beginning on the first day of the month following 60 days after the finality of the administrative decision establishing the overpayment.

      (7)(a) Deductions from unemployment insurance benefits pursuant to subsection (2)(a)(B) of this section shall be applied solely to the amount of the benefits liable to be repaid under this section.

      (b) All other payments shall be applied first to court costs, then to penalties, then to interest, then to the amount liable to be repaid.

      (8)(a) The following amounts collected under this section shall be paid into the Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund:

      (A) Amounts in repayment of benefits; and

      (B) The portion of penalties imposed under subsection (3) of this section that is 15 percent of the amount of benefits received.

      (b) The following amounts collected under this section shall be paid into the Employment Department Special Fraud Control Fund in accordance with the provisions of ORS 657.400:

      (A) Interest other than interest described in paragraph (c) of this subsection; and

      (B) The portion of penalties imposed under subsection (3) of this section that remains after subtraction of the portion of penalties described in paragraph (a)(B) of this subsection.

      (c) Interest payable on any portion of benefits that were funded by the federal government shall be paid to the United States Department of Labor.

      (9) The director shall adopt rules establishing standards and procedures for the repayment of benefits and payment of penalties and interest under this section. [Amended by 1963 c.14 §1; 1997 c.372 §1; 2005 c.182 §3; 2007 c.87 §2; 2013 c.703 §1; 2021 c.388 §1; 2025 c.432 §4]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1974–2012 · leading case: Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 54× “The department asserts that the board incorrectly interpreted ORS 657.310. We agree and reverse. Claimant Anthony Clark filed a claim for unemployment benefits in December 2000 and was awarded a weekly benefit of $376.”
Cook v. Emp. Div., 614 P.2d 1193 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “ORS 657.310. 1 Petitioner was also disqualified from receiving benefits for a period of 26 weeks pursuant to ORS 657.”
Steele v. Emp. Dep't, 923 P.2d 1252 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “On the other hand, ORS 657.310 provides that, “irrespective of the knowledge or intent of the person,” a person who makes misrepresentations or nondisclosures, resulting in the payment of benefits to which the person was not entitled, is liable for repayment or deduction from…”
Brown v. Adult & Fam. Servs., 643 P.2d 1266 (Or. 1982). · cites it 2× “ORS 657.310, 657.315. The instant case is, we think, representative of the manner in which disputes concerning unemployment compensation before the Employment Division are handled.”
Gearhart v. Emp. Div., 783 P.2d 536 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “[5] At some hearings, plaintiff also brought up issues of overpayments under ORS 657.310 and ORS 675.315 when those issues were not before her.”
German Auto Parts, Inc. v. Bureau of Labor & Indus., 826 P.2d 1026 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “ORS 657.310; ORS 657.315(1), (2). Public employers are obligated to reimburse the division for unemployment benefits deducted from an employee's settlement agreement or back pay award.”
Cook v. Emp. Div., 666 P.2d 264 (Or. Ct. App. 1983). “215 from receiving benefits for a period of 26 weeks for wilful failure to report a material fact in order to obtain unemployment compensation benefits.”
Thorne v. Gay, 758 P.2d 380 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “He completed approximately 720 hours of community service, and the trial court signed an amended restitution order on May 1,1985, stating that his community service work satisfied the restitution obligation.”
State v. White, 274 P.3d 313 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “106(1), 1 ordering defendant to pay restitution in the amount of the unemployment benefits that he had unlawfully received and, pursuant to ORS 657.310, 12 percent interest on the judgment for that amount.”
State v. Dumond, 526 P.2d 459 (Or. Ct. App. 1974). · cites it 2× “That the defendant has paid to the injured party all sums of money which the injured party would be entitled to in a civil suit pursuant to the terms of ORS 657.310. “3. That a civil compromise would be in the best interest of justice in this particular case.”
Shaffer v. Emp. Div., 577 P.2d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 657.310(1) provides: "Any person who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement or representation of, or fails to disclose, a material fact, and as a result thereof has received any amount as benefits under this chapter to which he was not entitled shall, irrespective of…”
Emp. Div. v. Davis, 585 P.2d 769 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Claimant also argues that there was no substantial evidence supporting application of the benefit recovery rules of ORS 657.310 — which relate to misrepresentation in obtaining unemployment benefits— to claimant.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.310(1) — 2 cases
Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “The department asserts that the board incorrectly interpreted ORS 657.310. We agree and reverse. Claimant Anthony Clark filed a claim for unemployment benefits in December 2000 and was awarded a weekly benefit of $376.”
Shaffer v. Emp. Div., 577 P.2d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “ORS 657.310(1) provides: "Any person who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement or representation of, or fails to disclose, a material fact, and as a result thereof has received any amount as benefits under this chapter to which he was not entitled shall, irrespective of…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.310(2) — 2 cases
Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “The department asserts that the board incorrectly interpreted ORS 657.310. We agree and reverse. Claimant Anthony Clark filed a claim for unemployment benefits in December 2000 and was awarded a weekly benefit of $376.”
Van Herwaarden v. Emp. Div., 704 P.2d 540 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 657.310(4) — 2 cases
Emp. Dep't v. Clark, 67 P.3d 991 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “The department asserts that the board incorrectly interpreted ORS 657.310. We agree and reverse. Claimant Anthony Clark filed a claim for unemployment benefits in December 2000 and was awarded a weekly benefit of $376.”
State v. White, 274 P.3d 313 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “106(1), 1 ordering defendant to pay restitution in the amount of the unemployment benefits that he had unlawfully received and, pursuant to ORS 657.310, 12 percent interest on the judgment for that amount.”
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.