2017 ORS 19.265¹
Payment of filing fee

At the time the notice of appeal is filed as provided in ORS 19.240 (How appeal to Court of Appeals taken), the appellant shall deposit with the State Court Administrator the amount of the appropriate filing fee. The timely deposit of such fee is not jurisdictional, but omission to do so shall be cause for dismissal of the appeal, subject to the provisions of ORS 19.270 (Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court and Court of Appeals) (3). [Formerly 19.035]

(formerly 19.035)

Notes of Decisions

Legislative require­ment of filing fee as prerequisite to processing ap­peal from administrative ruling is not such a restric­tion upon the performance of judicial func­tion that it must be ignored by courts. Ortwein v. Schwab, 262 Or 375, 498 P2d 757 (1972), aff’d 410 US 656, 93 S Ct 1172, 35 L Ed 2d 572 (1973), rehearing denied, 411 US 922 (1973)

When applied to indigent litigants, this sec­tion was not unconstitu­tional as abridging right to peti­tion govern­ment for redress of grievances under United States Constitu­tion. Ortwein v. Schwab, 262 Or 375, 498 P2d 757 (1972), aff’d 410 US 656, 93 S Ct 1172, 35 L Ed 2d 572 (1973), rehearing denied, 411 US 922 (1973)

When applied to indigent litigants, there was no viola­tion of due process under Oregon Constitu­tion to require pay­ment of filing fees in order to secure judicial review of Welfare Division’s orders. Ortwein v. Schwab, 262 Or 375, 498 P2d 757 (1972), aff’d410 US 656, 93 S Ct 1172, 35 L Ed 2d 572 (1973), rehearing denied, 411 US 922 (1973)

When applied to indigent litigants, right to obtain judicial review of ruling of State Welfare Division was not such a “funda­mental per­sonal right” that it denied equal protec­tion of laws under United States Constitu­tion to make such right dependent upon ability to pay $25 filing fee. Ortwein v. Schwab, 262 Or 375, 498 P2d 757 (1972), aff’d 410 US 656, 93 S Ct 1172, 35 L Ed 2d 572 (1973), rehearing denied, 411 US 922 (1973)

Chapter 19

Notes of Decisions

This chapter does not apply to workers’ compensa­tion pro­ceed­ings since it governs appellate review of lower court decisions and not decisions of administrative tribunals. SAIF v. Maddox, 60 Or App 507, 655 P2d 214 (1982), aff’d 295 Or 448, 667 P2d 529 (1983)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 19—Appeals, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors019.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 19, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano019.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
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.