Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820 (2026)

Complaints

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

      659A.820 Complaints. (1) As used in this section, for purposes of a complaint alleging an unlawful practice under ORS 659A.145 or 659A.421 or discrimination under federal housing law, “person claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful practice” includes, but is not limited to, a person who believes that the person:

      (a) Has been injured by an unlawful practice under ORS 659A.145 or 659A.421 or a discriminatory housing practice; or

      (b) Will be injured by an unlawful practice under ORS 659A.145 or 659A.421 or a discriminatory housing practice that is about to occur.

      (2) Any person claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful practice may file with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries a verified written complaint that states the name and address of the person alleged to have committed the unlawful practice. The complaint must be signed by the complainant. The complaint must set forth the acts or omissions alleged to be an unlawful practice. The complainant may be required to set forth in the complaint such other information as the commissioner may require. Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a complaint under this section must be filed no later than one year after the alleged unlawful practice.

      (3) A complaint alleging an unlawful employment practice as described in ORS 243.323, 659A.030, 659A.082, 659A.112 or 659A.370 must be filed no later than five years after the occurrence of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

      (4)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, a complaint may not be filed under this section if a civil action has been commenced in state or federal court alleging the same matters.

      (b) The prohibition described in paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply to a complaint alleging an unlawful practice under ORS 659A.145 or 659A.421 or alleging discrimination under federal housing law.

      (5) If an employer has one or more employees who refuse or threaten to refuse to abide by the provisions of this chapter or to cooperate in carrying out the purposes of this chapter, the employer may file with the commissioner a verified complaint requesting assistance by conciliation or other remedial action.

      (6) Except as provided in subsection (7) of this section, the commissioner shall notify the person against whom a complaint is made within 30 days of the filing of the complaint. The commissioner shall include in the notice the date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful practice.

      (7) The commissioner shall notify the person against whom a complaint alleging an unlawful practice under ORS 659A.145 or 659A.421 or discrimination under federal housing law is made within 10 days of the filing of the complaint. The commissioner shall include in the notice:

      (a) The date, place and circumstances of the alleged unlawful practice; and

      (b) A statement that the person against whom the complaint is made may file an answer to the complaint. [2001 c.621 §2; 2007 c.71 §214; 2007 c.903 §6; 2008 c.36 §7; 2009 c.108 §1; 2017 c.197 §5; 2019 c.343 §5; 2019 c.463 §5; 2021 c.293 §2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: Daniel v. Oregon Health & Sciences Univ., 262 F. Supp. 3d 1079 (D. Or. 2017).
Daniel v. Oregon Health & Sciences Univ., 262 F. Supp. 3d 1079 (D. Or. 2017). · cites it 3× “885 [Civil Action] alleging an unlawful employment practice must be commenced within one year after the occurrence of the unlawful employment practice unless a complaint has been timely filed under ORS 659A.820 [Complaints filed with BOLI].”
Just. v. Rockwell Collins, Inc., 117 F. Supp. 3d 1119 (D. Or. 2015). · cites it 2× “Or.Rev.Stat. §§ 659A.820, 659A.875. Nevertheless, a civil action premised on this statute must “be commenced within one year after the occurrence of the unlawful employment practice unless a complaint has been timely filed [with BOLI].”
Vollemans v. Town of Wallingford, 928 A.2d 586 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007). “§ 1-52 (5) (LexisNexis 2005) (three years); Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820 (1) (2005) (one year); W.”
Sharer v. Oregon, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1156 (D. Or. 2007). · cites it 3× “alleging an unlawful employment practice must be commenced within one year after the occurrence of the unlawful employment practice unless a complaint has been timely filed [with BOLI] under ORS 659A.820. (2) A person who has filed a complaint under ORS 659A.”
Frehoo, Inc. v. BOLI, 510 P.3d 888 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “825 (authorizing commissioner to file complaint in the manner specified under ORS 659A.820); see also ORS 659A.820 (permitting a “person claiming to be aggrieved by an unlawful practice” to file complaint with BOLI).”
Portland State Univ. Chapter of the Am. Ass'n of Univ. Professors v. Portland State Univ., 291 P.3d 658 (Or. 2012). “See ORS 659A.820 (regarding the filing of complaints with BOLI).”
Fenimore v. Blachly-Lane Cnty. C.E.A., 441 P.3d 699 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “Plaintiff's right to file a formal complaint with BOLI is provided by ORS 659A.820(2), under which "[a]ny person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice may file with the Commissioner of [BOLI] a verified written complaint *** [that] set[s] forth the acts or…”
Hatkoff v. Portland Adventist Med. Ctr., 287 P.3d 1113 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “Plaintiff specifically references the one-year limitation to file an employment discrimination complaint with the Bureau of Labor and Industries, ORS 659A.820, or in state court, ORS 659A.”
Mantia v. Hanson, 77 P.3d 1143 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). “wise discriminated against in compensation, or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment, by any person in violation of this subsection may, within 30 days after the employee has reasonable cause to believe that such a violation has occurred, file a complaint with the…”
Delima v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 616 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (D. Or. 2008). · cites it 2× “Under Or.Rev.Stat. § 659A.820(1), a plaintiff must file a complaint with BOLI within one year of the alleged unlawful discrimination in compensation.”
Hubbard v. Bimbo Bakeries USA Inc., 270 F. App'x 607 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “Because Oregon rules regarding administrative complaints use language in other situations regarding “the same set of facts,” the district court correctly concluded Hubbard’s state civil action and his administrative complaint did not allege the “same matters” within the meaning…”
Kemp v. Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., 307 P.3d 491 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “A court may order back pay in an action under this subsection only for the two-year period immediately preceding the filing of a complaint under ORS 659A.820 with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries, or if a complaint was not filed before the action was…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820(1) — 1 case
Delima v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 616 F. Supp. 2d 1055 (D. Or. 2008). “Under Or.Rev.Stat. § 659A.820(1), a plaintiff must file a complaint with BOLI within one year of the alleged unlawful discrimination in compensation.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820(2) — 3 cases
Fenimore v. Blachly-Lane Cnty. C.E.A., 441 P.3d 699 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “Plaintiff's right to file a formal complaint with BOLI is provided by ORS 659A.820(2), under which "[a]ny person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice may file with the Commissioner of [BOLI] a verified written complaint *** [that] set[s] forth the acts or…”
Hubbard v. Bimbo Bakeries USA Inc., 270 F. App'x 607 (9th Cir. 2008). “Because Oregon rules regarding administrative complaints use language in other situations regarding “the same set of facts,” the district court correctly concluded Hubbard’s state civil action and his administrative complaint did not allege the “same matters” within the meaning…”
Reyna v. City of Portland (D. Or. 2025).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820(3) — 2 cases
Perez v. Legacy Health (D. Or. 2025).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.820(4)(a) — 1 case
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.