ORS 109.794¹
Simultaneous proceedings

If a proceeding for enforcement under ORS 109.774 (Definitions for ORS 109.774 to 109.827) to 109.827 (Costs and expenses of district attorney and law enforcement officers) is commenced in a court of this state and the court determines that a proceeding to modify the determination is pending in a court of another state having jurisdiction to modify the determination under ORS 109.741 (Initial child custody jurisdiction) to 109.771 (Appearance of parties and child), the enforcing court shall immediately communicate with the modifying court. The proceeding for enforcement continues unless the enforcing court, after consultation with the modifying court, stays or dismisses the proceeding. [1999 c.649 §29]

Note: See note under 109.701 (Short title).

§§ 109.700 to 109.930

Note

Subject sec­tions all sub­se­quently repealed

Notes of Decisions

Habeas corpus is permissible pro­ce­dure to enforce custody decrees in conjunc­tion with these sec­tions. State ex rel Butler v. Morgan, 34 Or App 393, 578 P2d 814 (1978)

Long-term abduc­tion of child can result in jurisdic­tion vesting in state where child is located. Grubs v. Ross, 291 Or 263, 630 P2d 353 (1981)

In abduc­tion cases, jurisdic­tion of decree state continues for reasonable period of time following abduc­tion. Grubs v. Ross, 291 Or 263, 630 P2d 353 (1981)

Where Oregon court rendered original decree and had continuing jurisdic­tion, court was not re­quired to defer to court of an­oth­er state where modifica­tion was already pending. Fenn and Fenn, 63 Or App 506, 664 P2d 1143 (1983)

Uniform Child Custody Jurisdic­tion Act did not apply to paternity ac­tion, because ac­tion was not "custody determina­tion" for purposes of UCCJA. State ex rel Baldwin v. Hale, 86 Or App 361, 738 P2d 1016 (1987)

Filing of peti­tion under Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforce­ment of Support Act that included request for determina­tion of custody and visita­tion could not confer jurisdic­tion by con­sent where Uniform Child Custody Jurisdic­tion Act jurisdic­tional require­ments were not met. State ex rel State of Washington v. Bue, 117 Or App 477, 844 P2d 278 (1992)

Uniform Child Custody Jurisdic­tion Act applies to adop­tion pro­ceed­ings. State ex rel Torres v. Mason, 315 Or 386, 848 P2d 592 (1993)

Where supple­mental pleading alleges con­duct that could not have been alleged in initial peti­tion, other than new jurisdic­tional basis, jurisdic­tion is measured from time filing of supple­mental pleading commences ac­tion. Stubbs v. Weathersby, 320 Or 620, 892 P2d 991 (1995)

Except in unusual circumstances, Oregon law applies to issues arising out of adop­tion peti­tion properly filed in Oregon, including ques­tions of con­sent signed in an­oth­er state. Stubbs v. Weathersby, 320 Or 620, 892 P2d 991 (1995)

Federal Parental Kidnaping Preven­tion Act preempts state law with regard to modifica­tion of foreign state decrees. Henry and Keppel, 326 Or 166, 951 P2d 135 (1997)

Law Review Cita­tions

12 WLJ 629-641 (1976)

Chapter 109

Law Review Cita­tions

12 WLJ 569-589 (1976)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 109—Parent and Child Rights and Relationships, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­109.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 109, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­109ano.­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