ORS 107.104¹
Policy regarding settlement
  • enforcement of settlement terms
  • remedies

(1) It is the policy of this state:

(a) To encourage the settlement of suits for marital annulment, dissolution or separation; and

(b) For courts to enforce the terms of settlements described in subsection (2) of this section to the fullest extent possible, except when to do so would violate the law or would clearly contravene public policy.

(2) In a suit for marital annulment, dissolution or separation, the court may enforce the terms set forth in a stipulated judgment signed by the parties, a judgment resulting from a settlement on the record or a judgment incorporating a marital settlement agreement:

(a) As contract terms using contract remedies;

(b) By imposing any remedy available to enforce a judgment, including but not limited to contempt; or

(c) By any combination of the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection.

(3) A party may seek to enforce an agreement and obtain remedies described in subsection (2) of this section by filing a motion, serving notice on the other party in the manner provided by ORCP 7 and, if a remedy under subsection (2)(b) of this section is sought, complying with the statutory requirements for that remedy. All claims for relief arising out of the same acts or omissions must be joined in the same proceeding.

(4) Nothing in subsection (2) or (3) of this section limits a party’s ability, in a separate proceeding, to file a motion to set aside, alter or modify a judgment under ORS 107.135 (Vacation or modification of judgment) or to seek enforcement of an ancillary agreement to the judgment. [2001 c.203 §2; 2003 c.576 §108]

Notes of Decisions

Characteriza­tion of amount as spousal support in marital settle­ment agree­ment incorporated in dissolu­tion judg­ment is not binding on bankruptcy court. In re Jennings, 306 B.R. 672 (Bkrtcy. D. Or. 2004)

Court-approved marital settle­ment agree­ment that waives right of party to seek modifica­tion does not contravene public policy or impermissibly interfere with court jurisdic­tion under ORS 107.135 (Vacation or modification of judgment). McInnis and McInnis, 199 Or App 223, 110 P3d 639 (2005)

Where settle­ment agree­ment does not violate law or clearly contravene public policy, agree­ment supersedes authority of court under ORS 107.105 (Provisions of judgment) to determine just and proper disposi­tion of marital prop­erty. Patterson and Kanaga, 206 Or App 341, 136 P3d 1177 (2006)

Law Review Cita­tions

43 WLR 421 (2007)

Chapter 107

Notes of Decisions

Trial court has authority to es­tab­lish liquidated sum as amount owed by spouse under settle­ment agree­ment. Horner and Horner, 119 Or App 112, 849 P2d 560 (1993)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Emergency or necessity as the only grounds for waiver of 90-day period, (1971) Vol 35, p 982

Law Review Cita­tions

55 OLR 267-277 (1976); 27 WLR 51 (1991)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 107—Marital Dissolution, Annulment and Separation; Mediation and Conciliation Services; Family Abuse Prevention, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­Archive/­2007ors107.­pdf (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 107, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­107ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
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. Currency Information