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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 759.500 (2026)

Definitions for ORS 759.500 to 759.570

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

      759.500 Definitions for ORS 759.500 to 759.570. As used in ORS 759.500 to 759.570, unless the context requires otherwise:

      (1) “Allocated territory” means a geographic area for which the Public Utility Commission has allocated to no more than one person the authority to provide local exchange telecommunications service, the boundaries of which are set forth on an exchange map filed with and approved by the commission.

      (2) “Person” includes:

      (a) An individual, firm, partnership, corporation, association, cooperative or municipality; or

      (b) The agent, lessee, trustee or referee of an individual or entity listed in paragraph (a) of this subsection.

      (3) “Local exchange telecommunications service” has the meaning given that term in ORS 759.005, except that “local exchange telecommunications service” does not include service provided through or by the use of any equipment, plant or facilities:

      (a) For the provision of telecommunications services that 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 telecommunications service;

      (b) For the provision of local exchange telecommunications service, as defined in ORS 759.005, commonly known as “private lines” or “farmer lines”; or

      (c) For the provision of shared telecommunications service. [1987 c.447 §53; 2005 c.232 §24; 2007 c.825 §2]

 

      759.505 [1987 c.447 §54; repealed by 2005 c.232 §32]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2023 · leading case: Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1231 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1231 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 8× “In addition, Beaver Creek argues that: (1) the PUC’s promulgation of those rules was predicated on the territory allocation statute, ORS 759.500 et seq.; (2) the territory allocation statute is itself preempted by section 253 of the Telecommunications Act; and (3) consequently,…”
Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1240 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “4 **4 Finally, Beaver Creek argues that the PUC’s determination that the certification requirements of ORS 759.020 apply to cooperatives is precluded by federal preemption under Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.”
Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2023). “435 (2009) (electricity and gas); ORS 759.500(1) (2009) (telecommunications).”
Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 986 P.2d 592 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). “025(2) *262 (authorizing PUC to issue certificates of authority to cooperatives) and ORS 759.500 to ORS 759.570 (authorizing PUC to allocate cooperatives’ territory and customers).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 759.500(1) — 1 case
Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev. (Or. T.C. 2023). “435 (2009) (electricity and gas); ORS 759.500(1) (2009) (telecommunications).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 759.500(2) — 1 case
Beaver Creek Coop. Tel. Co. v. Pub. Util. Comm'n, 50 P.3d 1231 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “In addition, Beaver Creek argues that: (1) the PUC’s promulgation of those rules was predicated on the territory allocation statute, ORS 759.500 et seq.; (2) the territory allocation statute is itself preempted by section 253 of the Telecommunications Act; and (3) consequently,…”
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.