Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 774.140 (2026)

Interference with mailings or contributions

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

      774.140 Interference with mailings or contributions. (1) No utility, nor any of its employees, officers, members of the board of directors, agents, contractors or assignees, shall in any manner interfere with, delay, alter or otherwise discourage the distribution of any material or statement authorized by the provisions of this chapter for inclusion in periodic utility billings, nor in any manner interfere with, hamper, hinder or otherwise infringe upon a utility consumer’s right to contribute to Citizens’ Utility Board, nor in any manner hamper, hinder, harass, penalize or retaliate against any utility consumer because of the consumer’s contribution to, or participation in, any activities of the Citizens’ Utility Board.

      (2) No utility may change its mailing, accounting, or billing procedures if such change will hamper, hinder, or otherwise interfere with the ability of the Citizens’ Utility Board to distribute materials or statements authorized by this chapter. [1985 c.1 §12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2013–2013 · leading case: Elk Creek Mgmt. Co. v. Gilbert, 303 P.3d 929 (Or. 2013).
Elk Creek Mgmt. Co. v. Gilbert, 303 P.3d 929 (Or. 2013). “673(3) (prohibiting counties from retaliating against community mental health programs and community developmental disabilities programs “because” a program attempts to mediate a dispute between the program and a county); ORS 621.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 774.140(1) — 1 case
Elk Creek Mgmt. Co. v. Gilbert, 303 P.3d 929 (Or. 2013). “673(3) (prohibiting counties from retaliating against community mental health programs and community developmental disabilities programs “because” a program attempts to mediate a dispute between the program and a county); ORS 621.”
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.