Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450 (2026)

Appeal from suspension for refusal or failure of breath test

✓ current as of May 2026

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

813.450 Appeal from suspension for refusal or failure of breath test. (1) The petition to the circuit court appealing an order of the Department of Transportation after a hearing under ORS 813.410 shall state the nature of the petitioner’s interest and the ground or grounds upon which the petitioner contends the order should be reversed or remanded.

(2) The court shall conduct the review without a jury. Review shall be limited to the record of the department’s hearing.

(3) Any party to the proceedings before the circuit court may appeal from the judgment of the court to the Court of Appeals.

(4) Upon review in the circuit court and Court of Appeals, the court may affirm, reverse or remand the order as follows:

(a) If the court finds that the department has erroneously interpreted a provision of law and that a correct interpretation compels a particular action, it shall:

(A) Set aside or modify the order; or

(B) Remand the case to the department for further action under a correct interpretation of the provision of law.

(b) The court shall remand the order to the department if it finds the department’s exercise of discretion to be any of the following:

(A) Outside the range of discretion delegated to the agency by law.

(B) Inconsistent with a department rule, an officially stated department position, or a prior department practice, if the inconsistency is not explained by the department.

(c) The court shall set aside or remand the order if it finds that the order is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.

(5) Upon review, the court shall affirm the department’s order unless the court finds a ground for setting aside, modifying or remanding to the department under a specified provision of this section.

(6) In any review under this section, the court shall also review de novo determinations made by an agency that are subject to ORS 183.650 (4). [1985 c.672 §23; 1999 c.849 §§196,197; 2003 c.75 §69]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 70 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2022 · leading case: Suspension of the Driving Privileges of Gaylord v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 391 P.3d 900 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Suspension of the Driving Privileges of Gaylord v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 391 P.3d 900 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 5× “We reverse and remand so that the ALJ, on behalf of DMV, may make a credibility determination after consideration of all the evidence, including the improperly excluded urinalysis.”

Shakerin v. Motor Vehs. Div., 790 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 5× “ORS 813.450 provides for appeal of MVD orders to the circuit court and, thereafter, to the Court of Appeals.”

Blackman v. Motor Vehs. Div., 752 P.2d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 7× “” As required by ORS 813.450(1), petitioner specified the ground which he urged for reversal in his petition for review addressed to the circuit court.”

Bianco v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 307 P.3d 470 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “440 or upon remand under ORS 813.450, the department shall hold the hearing and issue a final order within 30 days of the date of the arrest * * *.”

Supension of Driving Privileges of Cole v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 87 P.3d 1120 (Or. 2004). · cites it 2× “410 and ORS 813.450. 9 He argued that the hearing officer’s finding that he had been stopped lawfully was not supported by substantial evidence in the record.”

Wahlgren v. Dep't of Transp., 102 P.3d 761 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “ORS 813.450(4); Robinson v. DMV, 191 Or App 122, 124 , 80 P3d 536 (2003).”

Petteys v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 98 P.3d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “ORS 813.450(4)(c). We conclude that it is and reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate DMV’s order.”

Sorenson v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div. (DMV), 78 P.3d 145 (Or. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “Thus, according to DMV, the court erred by construing ORS 813.450 to include authority to vacate a suspension order on a ground not included within its provisions.”

Gildroy v. Motor Vehs. Div., 848 P.2d 96 (Or. 1993). “*621 Petitioner appealed to the circuit court, ORS 813.450, which vacated the suspension on the ground that the police had violated OAR 257-30-020(1) by not confirming before administering the test that petitioner had not taken anything by mouth, vomited, or regurgitated within…”

Davis v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 146 P.3d 378 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “ORS 813.450(4); Wahlgren v. DMV, 196 Or App 452, 454 , 102 P3d 761 (2004).”

Dyrdahl v. Dep't of Transp., 131 P.3d 770 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “Finally, the circuit court ruled that the state was estopped from suspending petitioner’s driving privileges under a settlement agreement between the attorneys for DMV and petitioner.”

State ex rel. Motor Vehs. Div.. v. Norblad, 882 P.2d 598 (Or. 1994). · cites it 4× “The applicable appeal provisions are as provided under ORS 813.450 and section 24, chapter 672, Oregon Laws 1985.”

Show all 70 citing cases →

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(1) — 4 cases

State ex rel. Motor Vehs. Div.. v. Norblad, 882 P.2d 598 (Or. 1994). “The applicable appeal provisions are as provided under ORS 813.450 and section 24, chapter 672, Oregon Laws 1985.”

Blackman v. Motor Vehs. Div., 752 P.2d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). “” As required by ORS 813.450(1), petitioner specified the ground which he urged for reversal in his petition for review addressed to the circuit court.”

Nelson v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. (In re Nelson), 447 P.3d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).

Brown v. Motor Vehs. Div., 967 P.2d 919 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(2) — 4 cases

Suspension of the Driving Privileges of Gaylord v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 391 P.3d 900 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “We reverse and remand so that the ALJ, on behalf of DMV, may make a credibility determination after consideration of all the evidence, including the improperly excluded urinalysis.”

State v. Krueger, 12 P.3d 53 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).

Wood v. Motor Vehs. Div., 763 P.2d 190 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

Veilleux v. Motor Vehs. Div., 756 P.2d 70 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(3) — 5 cases

Hays v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 209 P.3d 405 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).

Hays v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 209 P.3d 405 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).

Walker v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 295 P.3d 167 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).

Hayes v. Motor Vehs. Div., 833 P.2d 1329 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Ezzell v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch (DMV), 17 P.3d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4) — 36 cases

Wahlgren v. Dep't of Transp., 102 P.3d 761 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “ORS 813.450(4); Robinson v. DMV, 191 Or App 122, 124 , 80 P3d 536 (2003).”

Shakerin v. Motor Vehs. Div., 790 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “ORS 813.450 provides for appeal of MVD orders to the circuit court and, thereafter, to the Court of Appeals.”

Davis v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 146 P.3d 378 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “ORS 813.450(4); Wahlgren v. DMV, 196 Or App 452, 454 , 102 P3d 761 (2004).”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4)(a) — 5 cases

Bish v. Motor Vehs. Div., 776 P.2d 1320 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).

Nelson v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. (In re Nelson), 447 P.3d 1212 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).

Blaisdell v. Motor Vehs. Div., 929 P.2d 1073 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4)(a)(A) — 1 case

Johnson v. Driver & Motor Vehs. Servs. Div., 322 P.3d 1157 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4)(b) — 1 case

Fisher v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 125 P.3d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4)(b)(C) — 3 cases

Bergstrom v. Motor Vehs. Div., 799 P.2d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Walls v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 960 P.2d 888 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(4)(c) — 12 cases

Shakerin v. Motor Vehs. Div., 790 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “ORS 813.450 provides for appeal of MVD orders to the circuit court and, thereafter, to the Court of Appeals.”

Petteys v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 98 P.3d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “ORS 813.450(4)(c). We conclude that it is and reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate DMV’s order.”

Cibula v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 123 P.3d 382 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.450(5) — 5 cases

Shakerin v. Motor Vehs. Div., 790 P.2d 1180 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “ORS 813.450 provides for appeal of MVD orders to the circuit court and, thereafter, to the Court of Appeals.”

Gildroy v. Motor Vehs. Div., 793 P.2d 332 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

Teague v. Motor Vehs. Div., 860 P.2d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).

Green v. Motor Vehs. Div., 808 P.2d 729 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

Hoefling v. Motor Vehs. Div., 799 P.2d 176 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

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.