2015 ORS § 30.260¹

Definitions for ORS 30.260 to 30.300

Caution-flag-2-25x25
This section is amended
Effective April 4, 2016
Relating to child welfare; creating new provisions; amending ORS 30.260, 109.070, 109.319, 128.640, 278.322, 418.205, 418.210, 418.215, 418.240, 418.246, 418.250, 418.255, 418.260, 418.263, 418.265, 418.270, 418.275, 418.280, 418.285, 418.290, 418.295, 418.305, 418.306, 418.312, 418.325, 418.327, 418.475, 418.485, 418.495, 418.625, 418.647, 418.950, 418.990, 418.992, 418.993, 418.995, 418.998, 419A.004, 419B.005, 419B.371, 441.277, 443.830, 479.210, 479.217, 497.162, 609.652 and 657.060; and declaring an emergency.

As used in ORS 30.260 (Definitions for ORS 30.260 to 30.300) to 30.300 (ORS 30.260 to 30.300 exclusive), unless the context requires otherwise:

(1) Department means the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.

(2) Director means the Director of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.

(3) Governing body means the group or officer in which the controlling authority of any public body is vested.

(4) Public body means:

(a) A public body as defined in ORS 174.109 (Public body defined);

(b) Any nonprofit corporation that is organized and existing under ORS chapter 65 and that has only political subdivisions or municipal, quasi-municipal or public corporations in this state as members;

(c) A private child-caring agency, as defined in ORS 418.205 (Definitions for ORS 418.205 to 418.310 and 418.992 to 418.998), that meets the criteria specified in ORS 278.322 (Child care facility liability insurance coverage) (1)(a) and that receives more than 50 percent of its funding from the state for the purpose of providing residential treatment to children who have been placed in the care and custody of the state or that provides residential treatment to children more than half of whom have been placed in the care and custody of the state; or

(d) A private, nonprofit organization that provides public transportation services if more than 50 percent of the organizations funding for the purpose of providing public transportation services is received from governmental bodies.

(5) State means:

(a) State government as defined in ORS 174.111 (State government defined);

(b) The State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation; and

(c) The Oregon Utility Notification Center.

(6) Local public body means any public body other than the state.

(7) Nuclear incident has the meaning given that term in 42 U.S.C. 2014(q).

(8) Tort means the breach of a legal duty that is imposed by law, other than a duty arising from contract or quasi-contract, the breach of which results in injury to a specific person or persons for which the law provides a civil right of action for damages or for a protective remedy. [1967 c.627 §1; 1975 c.609 §11; 1977 c.823 §1; 1981 c.109 §1; 1987 c.915 §9; subsections (7) and (8) enacted as 1987 c.705 §6; 1989 c.905 §1; 1989 c.1004 §2; 1993 c.500 §3; 1997 c.215 §4; 2005 c.684 §1; 2005 c.798 §2; 2009 c.67 §9]

Notes of Decisions

Private, nonprofit corpora­tion in business of providing hospital services which employed medical residents through contractual arrange­ment with University of Oregon Health Sciences Center did not thereby become instru­mentality of the state. Themins v. Emanuel Lutheran Charity Bd., 54 Or App 901, 637 P2d 155 (1981), Sup Ct review denied

An irriga­tion district is a public body. Miller v. Grants Pass Irriga­tion Dist., 297 Or 312, 686 P2d 324 (1984)

Breach of fiduciary duty claim is subject to tort claim notice require­ments. Hanggi v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 132 Or App 601, 889 P2d 365 (1995)

Viola­tion of federal labor laws is tort of failure to comply with statutory duty, not breach of duty arising out of employ­ment contract. Butterfield v. State of Oregon, 163 Or App 227, 987 P2d 569 (1999), Sup Ct review denied

Ac­tion for money had and received concerns legally imposed duty arising from quasi-contract and, thus, is not subject to Oregon Tort Claims Act. Comcast of Oregon II, Inc. v. City of Eugene, 346 Or 238, 209 P3d 800 (2009)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Tort Claims Act coverage of individuals contracting with CSD to provide medical, etc. services for students at juvenile training schools, (1980) Vol 41, p 11

Notes of Decisions

Dismissal of ac­tion for per­sonal injuries was improper where based solely upon allega­tions of complaint and allega­tions did not state sufficient facts for court to determine whether particular govern­mental act was discre­tionary func­tion or duty. Hulen v. City of Hermiston, 30 Or App 1141, 569 P2d 665 (1977)

Where plaintiff was mis­takenly arrested following computer retrieval of identifying and locator data for individual of similar name, demurrer as to three of defendants was properly sustained because plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts from which duty to plaintiff could be discerned, and summary judg­ment as to two of defendants was improperly allowed because affidavits did not reveal whether defendants acts were discre­tionary or ministerial. Murphy v. City of Portland, 36 Or App 745, 585 P2d 732 (1978)

Complaint allega­tion that plaintiff submitted applica­tion for building permit in proper form was sufficient to allow pros­e­cu­­tion of claim against public of­fi­cer. Dykeman v. State, 39 Or App 629, 593 P2d 1183 (1979)

Even if Childrens Services Divisions failure to follow re­quired APA rulemaking pro­ce­dures could constitute tort within meaning of these sec­tions, CSD was immune from tort liability under ORS 30.265 (Scope of liability of public body, officers, employees and agents) (3)(f) where it terminated its benefit program without prior rulemaking pro­ce­dures. Burke v. Childrens Services Division, 288 Or 533, 607 P2d 141 (1980)

Ac­tions brought under 42 U.S.C. 1981 are subject to two-year statute of limita­tions of Tort Claims Act. Loiseau v. Dept. of Human Resources, 558 F Supp 521 (1983)

Where police of­fi­cer pursued plaintiff in marked police car with lights and siren activated in area defendant was assigned to patrol, with no known motive other than to fulfill duty as police of­fi­cer, trial court was correct in concluding that defendant was acting in course and scope of employ­ment, despite plaintiffs claim that defendants acts were excessive. Brungardt v. Barton, 69 Or App 440, 685 P2d 1021 (1984)

Plaintiff in 42 U.S.C. 1983 ac­tion brought under the Oregon Tort Claims Act against municipality for ac­tions of its employes need not show that employes acted according to custom or usage as in federal §1983 ac­tion. Haase v. City of Eugene, 85 Or App 107, 735 P2d 1258 (1987)

Limita­tions of Oregon Tort Claims Act do not apply to claims brought in state court alleging viola­tion of federal Civil Rights Act. Rogers v. Saylor, 306 Or 267, 760 P2d 232 (1988)

Mayor was immune from liability in tort claim under this sec­tion where former chief of police brought tort ac­tion in connec­tion with her removal from office. Harrington v. City of Portland, 708 F Supp 1561 (D. Or. 1988)

Where plaintiffs brought ac­tion under 42 U.S.C 1983 and this sec­tion after defendant Childrens Services Division employees removed plaintiffs child from home following reports of abuse, defendants are entitled to absolute immunity under this sec­tion for their discre­tionary acts as provided by ORS 30.265 (Scope of liability of public body, officers, employees and agents) (3). Tennyson v. Childrens Services Division, 308 Or 80, 775 P2d 1365 (1989)

There is no legislative purpose to extend defini­tion of agent to control to include ostensible agent when doctrine of apparent authority is intended to achieve different purpose. Giese v. Bay Area Health District, 101 Or App 410, 790 P2d 1198 (1990), Sup Ct review denied

Because there was evidence that resident was not hospitals agent in first place, fact that loaned servant doctrine does not eliminate agency rela­tionship between hospital and employee who assists physician in surgery did not give plaintiff grounds for di­rected verdict. Shepard v. Sisters of Providence, 102 Or App 196, 793 P2d 1384 (1990)

Completed Cita­tions

State Forester v. Umpqua R. Nav. Co., 258 Or 10, 478 P2d 631 (1970), cert. denied, 404 US 826 (1971)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Liability of members of the State Water Resources Board for damages of party adversely affected by reclassifica­tion, (1972) Vol 36, p 250; faculty members scope of employ­ment, (1975) Vol 37, p 911; state liability for neg­li­gent opera­tion by drivers of state-owned vehicles in authorized car pool, (1978) Vol 39, p 101; State Accident Insurance Fund Corpora­tion as public body, (1980) Vol 40, p 344; Use of Liability Fund balances to pay cost of claims for which date of loss precedes authorized imple­menta­tion date of state self-insurance program, (1981) Vol 41, p 329; Depart­ment of Veterans Affairs fee appraisers and inspectors as agents of state for purposes of tort liability, (1981) Vol 42, p 103; CPAs and PAs volunteering services to investigate and review complaints against accountancy licensees as employes or agents of public body, (1983) Vol 43, p 145; Cause of ac­tion under Oregon Tort Claims Act for declarative or injunctive relief or for viola­tion of federal statute,

(1985) Vol. 44, p 416; Oregon Medical Insurance Pool, board, members, employes and agents immune from tort claims, (1989) Vol 46, p 155; director and other state employes are covered by Oregon Tort Claims Act, (1989) Vol 46, p 155; various per­sons have immunity from pros­e­cu­­tion for crim­i­nal acts committed in carrying out pool programs, (1989) Vol 46, p 155

Law Review Cita­tions

53 OLR 371 (1974); 23 WLR 493, 507 (1987); 69 OLR 157 (1990); 38 WLR 657 (2002); 50 WLR 619 (2014)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 30—Actions and Suits in Particular Cases, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors030.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 30, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano030.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
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.