2017 ORS 192.490¹
(Title not available: statute has been repealed or renumbered.)

[1973 c.794 §9; 1975 c.308 §3; 1981 c.897 §40; renumbered 192.431 (Court authority in reviewing action denying right to inspect public records) in 2017]

Notes of Decisions

Where plaintiff obtained alternative writ of mandamus compelling defendants to produce public docu­ments district attorney had ordered defendants to disclose under Public Records Law, plaintiff was not entitled to costs, disburse­ments or attorney fees because mandamus under ORS 34.110 (When and to whom writ issued) is not pro­ceed­ing for injunctive or declaratory relief under this sec­tion. State ex rel Oregon Television, Inc. v. Prophet, 97 Or App 525, 776 P2d 592 (1989)

This sec­tion does not support award of attorney fees against private party that intervened to defend public body’s refusal to disclose record. Western Communica­tions, Inc. v. Deschutes County, 100 Or App 706, 788 P2d 1013 (1990), Sup Ct review denied

Where plaintiff publishing company prevailed in suit by es­tab­lishing that school district’s policy exempting public records from disclosure is unenforceable, plaintiff is entitled to reasonable attorney fees at trial and on ap­peal. Guard Publishing Co. v. Lane County School Dist., 310 Or 32, 791 P2d 854 (1990)

When, instead of complying with pro­ce­dures stated in this pro­vi­sion for either complying with or challenging order to disclose public records, public body filed peti­tion for review of case raising some of same issues in present case, trial court erred in denying attorney fees to plaintiff. Davis v. Walker, 108 Or App 128, 814 P2d 547 (1991)

Good faith of party failing to comply with Attorney General order is irrelevant to award of attorney fees and costs. Gray v. Salem-Keizer School District, 139 Or App 556, 912 P2d 938 (1996), Sup Ct review denied

Failure of public body to provide Attorney General or district attorney with state­ment of reasons for believing public record should not be disclosed does not prevent public body from asserting disclosure exemp­tion in ac­tion for declaratory or injunctive relief. In Defense of Animals v. OHSU, 199 Or App 160, 112 P3d 336 (2005)

Circuit court has authority to review reasonableness of public body fees. In Defense of Animals v. OHSU, 199 Or App 160, 112 P3d 336 (2005)

Failure to comply with Attorney General’s order “in full” refers only to noncompliance with Attorney General’s order to disclose record to peti­tioner under ORS 192.450. Klamath County School District v. Teamey, 207 Or App 250, 140 P3d 1152 (2006), Sup Ct review denied

“Attorney fees” means reasonable value of services performed by attorney, including services performed by attorney who acted pro se. Colby v. Gunson, 349 Or 1, 238 P3d 374 (2010)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 192—Records; Public Reports and Meetings, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors192.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 192, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano192.­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.