2015 ORS 14.270¹
Time of making motion for change of judge in certain circumstances
  • limit of two changes of judge

An affidavit and motion for change of judge to hear the motions and demurrers or to try the case shall be made at the time of the assignment of the case to a judge for trial or for hearing upon a motion or demurrer. Oral notice of the intention to file the motion and affidavit shall be sufficient compliance with this section providing that the motion and affidavit are filed not later than the close of the next judicial day. No motion to disqualify a judge to whom a case has been assigned for trial shall be made after the judge has ruled upon any petition, demurrer or motion other than a motion to extend time in the cause, matter or proceeding; except that when a presiding judge assigns to the presiding judge any cause, matter or proceeding in which the presiding judge has previously ruled upon any such petition, motion or demurrer, any party or attorney appearing in the cause, matter or proceeding may move to disqualify the judge after assignment of the case and prior to any ruling on any such petition, motion or demurrer heard after such assignment. No party or attorney shall be permitted to make more than two applications in any action or proceeding under this section. [1955 c.408 §1(3); 1959 c.667 §2; 1969 c.144 §1; 1981 c.215 §7; 1995 c.781 §30]

Notes of Decisions

Where trial judge had pre­vi­ously entered order enjoining defendant during pendency of lawsuit, defendant's mo­tion to disqualify judge was untimely. Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 280 Or 693, 573 P2d 283 (1977)

For purposes of mo­tion for change of judge, time of assign­ment of case to judge commences when party learns of assign­ment. Allee v. Morrow, 175 Or App 308, 28 P3d 651 (2001), Sup Ct review denied

Knowledge of party's attorney re­gard­ing assign­ment of judge is imputable to party. Allee v. Morrow, 175 Or App 308, 28 P3d 651 (2001), Sup Ct review denied

Whether defendant was represented by counsel at time defendant learned of judge assign­ment does not affect time limit for filing affidavit and mo­tion to change judge. State v. Pena, 345 Or 198, 191 P3d 659 (2008)

Notes of Decisions

These sec­tions deal with matters different from those governed by Article VII (Amended), sec­tion 8 of the state constitu­tion, and were not repealed by adop­tion of that pro­vi­sion. State ex rel Oliver v. Crookham, 302 Or 533, 731 P2d 1018 (1987)

An affidavit supporting mo­tion to recuse judge under these sec­tions must allege circumstances which would permit party or attorney reasonably to believe that party or attorney will not receive fair trial. State ex rel Oliver v. Crookham, 302 Or 533, 731 P2d 1018 (1987)

"Prejudice" as used in these sec­tions cannot be read so broadly as to subsume any views as to judge's judicial competency. State ex rel Bowman v. Crookham, 302 Or 544, 731 P2d 1025 (1987)

Where affidavit in support of relator's mo­tion for change of judge recited that judge is oriented towards pros­e­cu­­tion and that crim­i­nal defendants cannot get fair trial in his court, allega­tions were sufficient to require hearing to determine if relator had good faith belief that she could not obtain fair trial. State ex rel Bowman v. Crookham, 302 Or 544, 731 P2d 1025 (1987)

Where judge took af­firm­a­tive ac­tion to publicize dispute between judge and attorney, cumulative effect of dispute and judge's reac­tion weighed in favor of recusal in unrelated case. In re Schenck, 318 Or 402, 870 P2d 185 (1994)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 14—Jurisdiction; Venue; Change of Judge, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors014.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 14, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano014.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.