2007 ORS 426.310¹
Reimbursement of county in case of nonresident patients

(1) If the mentally ill person is a resident of some other county in this state, the county making the commitment shall be reimbursed by the county of which the person is a resident. All reasonable and actual expenses incurred and paid by the county by reason of the care, custody, treatment, investigation examination and commitment hearing shall, upon presentation of a copy of the order of the judge making the examination and commitment, together with a properly itemized and certified claim covering the expense, be promptly paid to the county by the county of which the person was a resident. The expenses reimbursed under this subsection shall include any expenses incurred to pay for representation of the state’s interest under ORS 426.100 (Advice of court) and 426.250 (Payment of costs related to commitment proceedings).

(2) If an allegedly mentally ill person is a resident of some other county in this state, a county attempting a commitment shall be reimbursed by the county of which the person is a resident, as defined in ORS 426.241 (Payment of care, custody and treatment costs), for all actual, reasonable expenses incurred and paid by the county attempting commitment by reason of the care, custody, treatment, investigation examination and commitment hearing. The expenses reimbursed under this subsection shall include any expenses incurred to pay for representation of the state’s interest under ORS 426.100 (Advice of court) and 426.250 (Payment of costs related to commitment proceedings). [Amended by 1975 c.690 §22; 1977 c.764 §7; 1979 c.392 §2; 1987 c.903 §34]

Notes of Decisions

The doctor-patient privilege applies under these sec­tions. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Prior to commit­ment there must be evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is mentally ill as defined. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

The Oregon commit­ment statutes are not unconstitu­tional on the grounds of vagueness or as an invasion of privacy as protected by the Ninth and Fourteenth Amend­ments to the United States Constitu­tion. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Oregon Constitu­tion did not require jury in mental commit­ment hearings. State v. Mills, 36 Or App 727, 585 P2d 1143 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Alleged mentally ill per­son does not have right to remain silent in civil commit­ment pro­ceed­ing. State v. Matthews, 46 Or App 757, 613 P2d 88 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Cita­tions

9 WLJ 63-85 (1973)

Chapter 426

Notes of Decisions

The entire statutory scheme of involuntary commit­ment provides adequate procedural safeguards which satisfies the require­ments of due process and equal protec­tion. Dietrich v. Brooks, 27 Or App 821, 558 P2d 357 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

County of residence paying mental commit­ment costs, (1979) Vol 40, p 147; civil commit­ment to Mental Health Division of per­son against whom crim­i­nal charges are pending, (1980) Vol 41, p 91

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 448 (1979)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 426—Persons With Mental Illness; Sexually Dangerous Persons, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­426.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 426, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­426ano.­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.