Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 734.063 (2026)

Court order; hearings; notice

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

734.063 Court order; hearings; notice. (1) Upon petition by the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services under ORS 734.059, the court may issue the requested order immediately, ex parte and without hearing. The court in its order shall specify the duration of the order. The duration of an order shall be a period sufficient to enable the director to ascertain the condition of the insurer.

(2) On motion of the director or the insurer against whom an order under this section is issued, or on the court’s own motion, the court may hold such hearings from time to time as the court determines are desirable, after such notice as it determines appropriate, and may extend, shorten or modify the terms of the order.

(3) The court may vacate an order issued under this section if the court determines that the director has not commenced a rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding within a reasonable time.

(4) An order of the court directing a rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding vacates the order issued under this section.

(5) Entry of a seizure order under this section does not constitute an anticipatory breach of any contract of the insurer.

(6) At any time after a court issues an order under this section, the court may direct that notice of the order be given to a person if the court determines both of the following:

(a) That the person was not notified of the hearing on the order and did not appear at the hearing.

(b) That the interest of the person is or will be substantially affected by the order. [1989 c.425 §11]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2003–2003 · leading case: Kirkland v. Legion Ins., 343 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kirkland v. Legion Ins., 343 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). “Kirkland incorrectly argues that Legion’s rehabilitation was an anticipatory repudiation. First, the rehabilitation order expressly stated that it was not to be construed as a repudiation of Legion’s obligations.”

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.