2017 ORS 33.055¹
Procedure for imposition of remedial sanctions

(1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 161.685 (Effect of nonpayment of fines, restitution or costs), proceedings to impose remedial sanctions for contempt shall be conducted as provided in this section.

(2) The following persons may initiate the proceeding or, with leave of the court, participate in the proceeding, by filing a motion requesting that defendant be ordered to appear:

(a) A party aggrieved by an alleged contempt of court.

(b) A district attorney.

(c) A city attorney.

(d) The Attorney General.

(e) Any other person specifically authorized by statute to seek imposition of sanctions for contempt.

(3) If the alleged contempt is related to another proceeding, a motion to initiate a proceeding to impose remedial sanctions must be filed in accordance with rules adopted under ORS 33.145 (Rules).

(4) The person initiating a proceeding under this section shall file supporting documentation or affidavits sufficient to give defendant notice of the specific acts alleged to constitute contempt.

(5)(a) The court may issue an order directing the defendant to appear. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, the defendant shall be personally served with the order to appear in the manner provided in ORCP 7 and 9. The court may order service by a method other than personal service or issue an arrest warrant if, based upon motion and supporting affidavit, the court finds that the defendant cannot be personally served.

(b) The defendant shall be served by substituted service if personal service is waived under ORS 107.835 (Waiver of personal service in subsequent contempt proceeding). If personal service is waived under ORS 107.835 (Waiver of personal service in subsequent contempt proceeding), the defendant shall be served by the method specified in the waiver.

(6) The court may impose a remedial sanction only after affording the defendant opportunity for a hearing tried to the court. The defendant may waive the opportunity for a hearing by stipulated order filed with the court.

(7) A defendant has no right to a jury trial and, except as provided in this section, has only those rights accorded to a defendant in a civil action.

(8) A defendant is entitled to be represented by counsel. A court shall not impose on a defendant a remedial sanction of confinement unless, before the hearing is held, the defendant is:

(a) Informed that such sanction may be imposed; and

(b) Afforded the same right to appointed counsel required in proceedings for the imposition of an equivalent punitive sanction of confinement.

(9) If the defendant is not represented by counsel when coming before the court, the court shall inform the defendant of the right to counsel, and of the right to appointed counsel if the defendant is entitled to, and financially eligible for, appointed counsel under subsection (8) of this section.

(10) Inability to comply with an order of the court is an affirmative defense.

(11) In any proceeding for imposition of a remedial sanction other than confinement, proof of contempt shall be by clear and convincing evidence. In any proceeding for imposition of a remedial sanction of confinement, proof of contempt shall be beyond a reasonable doubt.

(12) Proceedings under this section are subject to rules adopted under ORS 33.145 (Rules). Proceedings under this section are not subject to the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure except as provided in subsection (5) of this section or as may be provided in rules adopted under ORS 33.145 (Rules). [1991 c.724 §5; 1993 c.448 §7; 2001 c.962 §77; 2005 c.22 §24; 2017 c.252 §1]

Notes of Decisions

Attorney is not liable for arrest made upon defective warrant unless, in filing mo­tion for warrant, attorney acts in bad faith, inten­tionally misrepresents facts to judge or otherwise acts with malice. Hiber v. Creditors Collec­tion Service, 154 Or App 408, 961 P2d 898 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

Court’s inherent power to enforce orders through contempt pro­ceed­ing on own mo­tion does not allow court acting upon mo­tion and affidavit to disregard require­ment for predicate finding that contemnor cannot be served per­sonally. Hiber v. Creditors Collec­tion Service, 154 Or App 408, 961 P2d 898 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

Person is party “aggrieved” by contempt if per­son asserts facts showing contempt affects substantial interest of per­son or if per­son has per­sonal stake in underlying judicial pro­ceed­ing beyond abstract interest in proper applica­tion of law. Oregon Educa­tion Associa­tion v. Oregon Taxpayers United PAC, 227 Or App 37, 204 P3d 855 (2009)

Notes of Decisions

Contempt pro­ceed­ing instituted under these sec­tions for husband’s failure to pay spousal support pursuant to dissolu­tion decree is separate pro­ceed­ing from dissolu­tion and trial court’s jurisdic­tion to hold husband in contempt was therefore not defeated by husband’s ap­peal from dissolu­tion decree. Oliver and Oliver, 81 Or App 115, 724 P2d 869 (1986), Sup Ct review denied

Choice-of-evils de­fense could not exonerate defendants charged with contempt for violating injunc­tion arising from demonstra­tion to prevent abor­tions because de­fense is available only if defendants’ necessary con­duct is not inconsistent with other pro­vi­sions of law. Downtown Women’s Center v. Advocates for Life, Inc., 111 Or App 317, 826 P2d 637 (1992)

Contempt pro­ceed­ings are not subject to laws governing venue for crim­i­nal pro­ceed­ings. Bachman v. Bachman, 171 Or App 665, 16 P3d 1185 (2000), Sup Ct review denied

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 33—Special Proceedings and Procedures, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors033.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 33, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano033.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
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.