ORS 24.220¹
Recognition of foreign judgment
  • conclusiveness
  • exceptions

(1) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4) of this section, a foreign judgment meeting the requirements of subsection (2) of this section is conclusive between the parties to the extent that it grants or denies recovery of a sum of money. The foreign judgment is enforceable in the same manner as the judgment of a sister state which is entitled to full faith and credit.

(2) ORS 24.200 (Definitions for ORS 24.200 to 24.255) to 24.255 (Short title) apply to any foreign judgment that is final and conclusive and enforceable where rendered even though an appeal therefrom is pending or it is subject to appeal.

(3) A foreign judgment is not conclusive if:

(a) The judgment was rendered under a system which does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law;

(b) The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant; or

(c) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter.

(4) A foreign judgment may not be recognized if:

(a) The defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend;

(b) The judgment was obtained by fraud;

(c) The cause of action on which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this state;

(d) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment;

(e) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute in question was to be settled otherwise than by proceedings in that court;

(f) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action; or

(g) The party seeking to enforce the foreign judgment fails to demonstrate that the foreign court that rendered the judgment recognizes and enforces judgments of the state and federal courts of the United States. [1977 c.61 §§2,3,4; 2003 c.281 §2]

Notes of Decisions

Where, under California law, foreign judg­ment was found to be "final and conclusive and enforceable" it was, pursuant to this sec­tion, duly registered and enforceable as though it were an Oregon judg­ment and trial court did not abuse discre­tion in refusal to stay execu­tion of judg­ment pursuant to ORCP 72 until there was resolu­tion of independent California suit re­gard­ing party's liability under judg­ment. River City Bank v. DeBenedetti, 90 Or App 624, 752 P2d 1305 (1988)

Where collec­tion ac­tion is commenced in Oregon court to enforce foreign judg­ment, Oregon law applies to allowance of cost and litiga­tion expenses incurred in collec­tion ac­tion. Holder v. Elg, 151 Or App 329, 948 P2d 763 (1997)

Chapter 24

Notes of Decisions

Foreign dissolu­tion decree need not be registered in order for court to have jurisdic­tion to modify decree. Walker v. Walker, 26 Or App 701, 554 P2d 591 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Cita­tions

57 OLR 377 (1978)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 24—Enforcement and Recognition of Foreign Judgments; Foreign-Money Claims, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­Archive/­2007ors24.­pdf (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 24, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­024ano.­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