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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.136 (2026)

Medical examinations and inquiries of employees

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

      659A.136 Medical examinations and inquiries of employees. (1) Except as provided in this section, an employer may not require that an employee submit to a medical examination, may not make inquiries of an employee as to whether the employee has a disability, and may not make inquiries of an employee as to the nature or severity of any disability of the employee, unless the examination or inquiry is shown to be job-related and consistent with business necessity.

      (2) An employer may conduct voluntary medical examinations, including voluntary medical histories, that are part of an employee health program available to employees at that work site. An employer may make inquiries into the ability of an employee to perform job-related functions.

      (3) Information obtained under subsection (2) of this section relating to the medical condition or history of any employee is subject to the same restrictions applicable to information acquired from medical examinations authorized under ORS 659A.133. [Formerly 659.448; 2007 c.70 §296; 2009 c.508 §12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2006–2015 · leading case: Benz v. West Linn Paper Co., 803 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (D. Or. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Benz v. West Linn Paper Co., 803 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (D. Or. 2011). · cites it 2× “” Or.Rev.Stat. § 659A.136. After asking Mr.”
Dew v. City of Scappoose, 145 P.3d 198 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “448 (1999), renumbered as ORS 659A.136 (2001) by discriminating against plaintiff based on the results of her psychological exam and inquiries related to her disabled status; and (6) the city violated former ORS 659.”
Heiple v. Henderson, 215 P.3d 891 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 5× “In furtherance of that goal, ORS 659A.136 limits the circumstances in which employers can require employees to submit to medical examinations or make inquiries as to whether employees are disabled.”
Van Patten v. State, 359 P.3d 469 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 5× “They brought this action against the state and the then-PEBB administrator, Kapowich, 1 contending that one aspect of the insurance program, a self assessment questionnaire, requires them to disclose disabilities, and, in so doing, violates a provision of the Americans with…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.136(1) — 2 cases
Heiple v. Henderson, 215 P.3d 891 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). “In furtherance of that goal, ORS 659A.136 limits the circumstances in which employers can require employees to submit to medical examinations or make inquiries as to whether employees are disabled.”
Van Patten v. State, 359 P.3d 469 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “They brought this action against the state and the then-PEBB administrator, Kapowich, 1 contending that one aspect of the insurance program, a self assessment questionnaire, requires them to disclose disabilities, and, in so doing, violates a provision of the Americans with…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.136(2) — 1 case
Van Patten v. State, 359 P.3d 469 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “They brought this action against the state and the then-PEBB administrator, Kapowich, 1 contending that one aspect of the insurance program, a self assessment questionnaire, requires them to disclose disabilities, and, in so doing, violates a provision of the Americans with…”
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.