These amendments are effective from August 1, 2021, through December 31, 2022.
The Oregon Supreme Court and Oregon Court of Appeals have approved a package of permanent amendments to the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure (ORAP). The amendments, which were prepared by the ORAP Committee, will become effective January 1, 2021.
The Chief Justice Order / Chief Judge Order adopting those amendments is available online at:
https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/rules/Pages/orap.aspx (“CJO 20-042/CJO 20-05 Order Adopting Permanent Amendments to ORAP”)
https://www.courts.oregon.gov/publications/other/Pages/misc.aspx (“Adoption of Amendments to the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure (Advance Sheets 25)”)
A clean version of the ORAPs incorporating those amendments will be posted in December.
For questions, please contact the ORAP Committee at [email protected].
The Oregon Supreme Court and Oregon Court of Appeals have approved a package of permanent amendments to the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure (ORAP). The amendments, which were prepared by the ORAP Committee, will become effective January 1, 2019.
In addition, the Oregon Supreme Court and Oregon Court of Appeals have approved a separate package of temporary amendments to the ORAPs. The temporary amendments, which are largely intended to address recent statutory amendments, will also become effective January 1, 2019. Unlike the permanent amendments, the temporary amendments will expire on December 31, 2020 (unless adopted as permanent amendments through the ORAP Committee process).
Both packages of amendments are available online at:
A clean version of all the ORAPs that includes both the permanent and temporary amendments will be posted in December.
The comment period is now closed.
Oregon Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas A. Balmer has approved a plan for a mandatory eFiling requirement for attorneys filing cases in Oregon’s circuit and appellate courts. The Oregon Judicial Department will circulate proposed court rules in the upcoming months for comment. The plan calls for a mandatory date of December 1, 2014 for the eleven circuit courts that currently have the eFiling component of the Oregon eCourt system, and includes a transition plan for those courts implementing the system later.
Mandatory eFiling for attorneys filing in the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court is expected to begin in the spring of 2015, following an amendment to the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure. Mandatory eFiling for the Oregon Tax Court will be assessed at a later date.
Click here for more information from the Oregon State Bar.
The Oregon appellate courts’ appellate filing fees have changed:
Civil Appeals and Judicial Review (ORS 21.010)
- Appellant (or Cross-Appellant) Fee $373
- Petitioner (or Cross-Petitioner) Fee $373
- Respondent Fee $373
Original Jurisdiction Mandamus, Habeas Corpus, and Quo Warranto Proceedings (ORS 21.010(5))
- Plaintiff or Petitioner $373
- Defendant or Respondent $373
Motions in Civil Appeal or Judicial Review
- Motion to Dismiss – Filing (by Respondent) $50
- Motion to Dismiss – Response/Answer $50
- Motion to Determine Jurisdiction – Filing $50
- Motion to Determine Jurisdiction – Response/Answer $50
- Motion to Continue or Extend Time – Filing $50
- Motion to Continue or Extend Time – Response/Answer $50
People outside the Portland area who wish to listen-in on the section’s February 28, 2013 Brown Bag CLE program may do so by telephone. If you are interested in registering as a call-in listener, please contact Derek Green for details at (503) 778-5264.
Effective January 28, 2013, the appellate courts will implement a number of temporary ORAP amendments. These result from process changes flowing from the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Electronic Content Management System — the final component of Oregon eCourt implementation in the appellate courts — and from the corresponding increased use of electronic documents in the appellate courts. As part of Oregon eCourt implementation, the Appellate Court Records Section (ACRS) no longer creates paper files for appellate cases; instead, ACRS maintains a more efficient electronic case file.
The temporary ORAP amendments may be found here, and a summary of the changes in Chief Justice Order 13-001/Chief Judge Order 13-02 is provided below:
- For conventional filings (i.e., submitted over the counter or by mail), the number of required copies of numerous documents is being decreased. For example, the number of copies of petitions for review and responses in the Supreme Court is being reduced from twelve to zero, and the number of copies of briefs in the Court of Appeals is being reduced from thirteen to five. A chart that summarizes the copy requirement changes for each court is attached to the Chief Justice/Chief Judge Order.
- The original of all conventionally filed briefs must have white paper covers of the same weight as the rest of the brief. This facilitates scanning of the original by ACRS staff to create an electronic version for the court’s appellate file and for further use by the court. (If copies of the particular brief are still required, the copies of conventionally filed briefs must still conform to the previous color and weight requirements, with exceptions for Supreme Court petitions for review and reconsideration, and responses to same.) The current email requirement set out in ORAP 9.17(6), relating to Supreme Court briefs, is being deleted.
- Corrections or amendments to previous filings must be made by submitting the entire corrected or amended filing. Previously, the courts had allowed parties to resubmit only the affected page(s). Any conventional copy requirement or eFiling document recovery charge that applied to the initial document again applies to the amended or corrected document.
- A motion or response to a motion and a supporting memorandum of law must be submitted as a single document, not as separate documents.
- A brief or other document that is the subject of a motion for leave to file that is granted, if filed simultaneously with the motion, will be treated as having been filed on the same date as the motion. Relatedly, a response to a memorandum of additional authorities filed simultaneously with a motion for leave to file is due 14 days after the entry date of the order granting the motion.
- When preparing an eFiling containing multiple parts, the filing must be submitted as a unified, single PDF file, rather than as separate eFiled documents or as a principal eFiled document with attached supporting documents, with only narrow exceptions that are specified in the rules. Examples of documents that must be eFiled as a single PDF file include: (1) notice of appeal, judgment being appealed, and certificate of service; (2) petition for judicial review, agency order as to which review is sought, and certificate of service; (3) petition for reconsideration, underlying decision as to which reconsideration is sought, and certificate of service; (4) petition for review, Court of Appeals decision as to which review is sought, and certificate of service; (5) motion, affidavit or declaration (if any), and certificate of service; (6) Supreme Court mandamus or habeas corpus petition, copy of order or written decision, and certificate of service; (7) Supreme Court memorandum in support of a mandamus or habeas corpus petition, excerpt of record, and certificate of service.
- A filing or attachment that includes confidential or sealed material must include in the caption the words “Includes Confidential Attachment” (or “sealed,” as appropriate) and must state in the filing the authority by which the attachment is deemed confidential or sealed. Also, a filer may not eFile a document that is sealed by operation of law or court order or — more typically — a document that has an attachment containing sealed material.
- Current ORAP 16.60, which, among other things, prohibits eFiling briefs in confidential cases, is being deleted.
- If an eFiler changes his or her email address, then the eFiler must notify the Oregon Judicial Department Enterprise Technology Division, as directed in an amendment to ORAP 16.10(2)(a)(v).
- Also, a companion Chief Justice/Chief Judge Order, 12-048/12-048 (September 5, 2012) updated — and in many cases, reduced — the number of copies for which an eFiling document recovery charge is assessed under ORAP 16.20(2). The updated Supreme Court document recovery charge list is here, and the Court of Appeals list is here.