2017 ORS 19.312¹
Supersedeas undertaking in certain actions against tobacco product manufacturer

(1) The provisions of this section apply only to civil actions against a tobacco product manufacturer as defined in ORS 323.800 (Definitions for ORS 323.800 to 323.806), or against an affiliate or successor of a tobacco product manufacturer, in which:

(a) The tobacco product manufacturer is subject to the requirements of ORS 323.806 (Required actions by manufacturers); and

(b) The state is not a plaintiff.

(2) In any civil action described in subsection (1) of this section, the supersedeas undertaking required of the tobacco product manufacturer, or of an affiliate or successor of the tobacco product manufacturer, as a condition of a stay of judgment throughout all appeals or discretionary appellate review, shall be established in the manner provided by the laws and court rules of this state applicable to supersedeas undertakings, but the amount of the supersedeas undertaking may not exceed $150 million.

(3) If at any time after the posting of the supersedeas undertaking pursuant to the provisions of this section the court determines that a tobacco product manufacturer, affiliate or successor, outside of the ordinary course of its business, is purposely dissipating or diverting assets for the purpose of avoiding payment on final judgment in the action, the court may condition continuance of the stay on an order requiring that the tobacco product manufacturer, affiliate or successor post a supersedeas undertaking in an amount up to the full amount of the judgment.

(4) The provisions of this section apply to any supersedeas undertaking required for a judgment entered by a court of this state and to any security required as a condition of staying enforcement of a foreign judgment under the provisions of ORS 24.135 (Grounds for staying enforcement of judgment) (2). [2003 c.804 §87; 2005 c.22 §9]

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.