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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 758.400 (2026)

Definitions for ORS 758.015 and 758.400 to 758.475

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

      758.400 Definitions for ORS 758.015 and 758.400 to 758.475. As used in ORS 758.015 and 758.400 to 758.475 unless the context requires otherwise:

      (1) “Allocated territory” means an area with boundaries established by a contract between persons furnishing a similar utility service and approved by the Public Utility Commission or established by an order of the commission approving an application for the allocation of territory.

      (2) “Person” includes individuals, firms, partnerships, corporations, associations, cooperatives and municipalities, or their agent, lessee, trustee or referee.

      (3) “Utility service” means service provided by any equipment, plant or facility for the distribution of electricity to users or the distribution of natural or manufactured gas to consumers through a connected and interrelated distribution system. “Utility service” does not include service provided through or by the use of any equipment, plant or facilities for the production or transmission of electricity or gas which pass through or over but are not used to provide service in or do not terminate in an area allocated to another person providing a similar utility service. [Formerly 757.605; 1979 c.62 §2; 1985 c.550 §8; 1987 c.447 §101; 1999 c.59 §232]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1987–2005 · leading case: Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald Pud, 125 P.3d 740 (Or. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald Pud, 125 P.3d 740 (Or. 2005). · cites it 5× “The legislature enacted the territorial allocation statutes for gas and electric utilities, now codified at ORS 758.400 to 758.475, in 1961. Or. Laws 1961, ch.”
Nw. Nat. Gas Co. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 99 P.3d 292 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 15× “Northwest argued to the PUC that this arrangement violates the Territorial Allocation Law, ORS 758.400 to 758.475, because it permits industrial consumers to receive utility service from connections to the mutually owned bypass pipeline rather than from Northwest.”
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald People's Util. Dist., 84 P.3d 167 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “he elimination and future prevention of duplication of utility facilities is a matter of statewide concern; and in order to promote the efficient and economic use and development and the safety of operation of utility services while providing adequate and reasonable service to…”
PacifiCorp v. City of Ashland, 749 P.2d 1189 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “We based that holding on our conclusion that, contrary to city's argument, the authority to regulate public utilities and to provide utility services, which various provisions in ORS chapters 221, 223 and 225 confer on cities, does not render the territorial allocation statutes,…”
Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 744 P.2d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “It contends in its first claim that the city has unlawfully provided electric service to customers who reside both within the city and within areas that, before the city annexed them, the Public Utility Commissioner (PUC) had allocated to plaintiff as an exclusive service…”
Cox v. Polk Cnty., 25 P.3d 970 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “015 and ORS 758.400 to ORS 758.475, “utility service” means services provided by “any equipment, plant or facility” for the distribution of electricity or gas).”
Pacificorp v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 770 F. Supp. 562 (D. Or. 1991). “he elimination and future prevention of duplication of utility facilities is a matter of statewide concern; and in order to promote the efficient and economic use and development and the safety of operation of utility services while providing adequate and reasonable service to…”
Columbia River People's Util. Dist. v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co., 40 F. Supp. 2d 1152 (D. Or. 1999). · cites it 2× “The elimination and future prevention of duplication of utility facilities is a matter of statewide concern; and in order to promote the efficient and economic use and development and the safety of operation of utility services while providing adequate and reasonable service to…”
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald People's Util. Dist., 125 P.3d 740 (Or. 2005). · cites it 5× “The legislature enacted the territorial allocation statutes for gas and electric utilities, now codified at ORS 758.400 to 758.475, in 1961. Or Laws 1961, ch 691.”
Douglas Elec. Coop. v. Cent. Lincoln People's Util. Dist., 991 P.2d 1060 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “They contended that neither section 12 nor ORS chapter 261 gives District the exclusive right to serve the mill and that the provisions of ORS 758.400 to ORS 758.475 instead provide the means by which a utility, including a people’s utility district, can obtain an exclusive…”
Cyrus v. Deschutes Cnty., 96 P.3d 858 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “he elimination and future prevention of duplication of utility facilities is a matter of statewide concern; and in order to promote the efficient and economic use and development and the safety of operation of utility services while providing adequate and reasonable service to…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 758.400(2) — 5 cases
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald Pud, 125 P.3d 740 (Or. 2005). “The legislature enacted the territorial allocation statutes for gas and electric utilities, now codified at ORS 758.400 to 758.475, in 1961. Or. Laws 1961, ch.”
Nw. Nat. Gas Co. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 99 P.3d 292 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “Northwest argued to the PUC that this arrangement violates the Territorial Allocation Law, ORS 758.400 to 758.475, because it permits industrial consumers to receive utility service from connections to the mutually owned bypass pipeline rather than from Northwest.”
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald People's Util. Dist., 84 P.3d 167 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “he elimination and future prevention of duplication of utility facilities is a matter of statewide concern; and in order to promote the efficient and economic use and development and the safety of operation of utility services while providing adequate and reasonable service to…”
Pacificorp v. City of Ashland, 744 P.2d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “It contends in its first claim that the city has unlawfully provided electric service to customers who reside both within the city and within areas that, before the city annexed them, the Public Utility Commissioner (PUC) had allocated to plaintiff as an exclusive service…”
Springfield Util. Bd. v. Emerald People's Util. Dist., 125 P.3d 740 (Or. 2005). “The legislature enacted the territorial allocation statutes for gas and electric utilities, now codified at ORS 758.400 to 758.475, in 1961. Or Laws 1961, ch 691.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 758.400(3) — 2 cases
Nw. Nat. Gas Co. v. Oregon Pub. Util. Comm'n, 99 P.3d 292 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “Northwest argued to the PUC that this arrangement violates the Territorial Allocation Law, ORS 758.400 to 758.475, because it permits industrial consumers to receive utility service from connections to the mutually owned bypass pipeline rather than from Northwest.”
Cox v. Polk Cnty., 25 P.3d 970 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “015 and ORS 758.400 to ORS 758.475, “utility service” means services provided by “any equipment, plant or facility” for the distribution of electricity or gas).”
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.