2015 ORS 36.625¹
Petition to compel or stay arbitration

(1) On petition of a person showing an agreement to arbitrate and alleging another person’s refusal to arbitrate pursuant to the agreement:

(a) If the refusing party does not appear or does not oppose the petition, the court shall order the parties to arbitrate; and

(b) If the refusing party opposes the petition, the court shall proceed summarily to decide the issue as provided in subsection (8) of this section and order the parties to arbitrate unless it finds that there is no enforceable agreement to arbitrate.

(2) On petition of a person alleging that an arbitration proceeding has been initiated or threatened but that there is no agreement to arbitrate, the court shall proceed summarily to decide the issue as provided in subsection (8) of this section. If the court finds that there is an enforceable agreement to arbitrate, it shall order the parties to arbitrate.

(3) If the court finds that there is no enforceable agreement to arbitrate, it may not order the parties to arbitrate pursuant to subsection (1) or (2) of this section.

(4) The court may not refuse to order arbitration because the claim subject to arbitration lacks merit or grounds for the claim have not been established.

(5) If a proceeding involving a claim referable to arbitration under an alleged agreement to arbitrate is pending in court, a petition under this section must be made in that court. Otherwise, a petition under this section may be made in any court as provided in ORS 36.725 (Venue).

(6) If a party makes a petition to the court to order arbitration, the court on just terms shall stay any judicial proceeding that involves a claim alleged to be subject to the arbitration until the court renders a final decision under this section.

(7) If the court orders arbitration, the court on just terms shall stay any judicial proceeding that involves a claim subject to the arbitration. If a claim subject to the arbitration is severable, the court may limit the stay to that claim.

(8) A judge shall decide all issues raised under a petition filed under ORS 36.600 (Definitions) to 36.740 (Relationship to electronic signatures in Global and National Commerce Act) unless there is a constitutional right to jury trial on the issue. If there is a constitutional right to jury trial on an issue, the issue shall be tried to a jury upon the request of any party to the proceeding. [2003 c.598 §7]

Note: See notes under 36.600 (Definitions).

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute (Ors 36.310)

Employ­ment Rela­tions Board has exclusive jurisdic­tion to enforce arbitra­tion agree­ments arising out of public-sector labor rela­tions pursuant to ORS 243.672 (Unfair labor practices) and 243.676 (Processing of unfair labor practice complaints). Smith v. State of Oregon, 31 Or App 15, 569 P2d 677 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Order entered directing parties to proceed with arbitra­tion was not final order subject to ap­peal under [former] ORS 19.010. Peter Kiewit v. Port of Portland, 291 Or 49, 628 P2d 720 (1981)

When a party seeks a declaratory judg­ment that it is not re­quired to comply with defendant's demand to arbitrate a dispute pursuant to their contract, the court may consider only those de­fenses to arbitra­tion which it could have considered had the party seeking arbitra­tion filed a peti­tion to compel arbitra­tion. Union County School District No. 1 v. Valley Inland Pacific Constructors, Inc., 59 Or App 602, 652 P2d 349 (1982)

Where insurer and insured disagreed about amount of damages insured should recover and insured peti­tioned for order compelling arbitra­tion without first making written demand for arbitra­tion pursuant to terms of insurance policy, parties' disagree­ment does not qualify as "failure, neglect or refusal...to perform." Moresi v. Na­tionwide Mutual, 309 Or 619, 789 P2d 667 (1990)

Where party is able to proceed ex parte under agreed arbitra­tion pro­ce­dure, party is not "aggrieved" by failure, neglect or refusal of other party. Shannon v. Swyers, 129 Or App 573, 879 P2d 1339 (1994)

In General

Duty of court to act "summarily" means court must decide issue of arbitrability expeditiously and without jury trial. Greene v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 228 Or App 379, 209 P3d 333 (2009), Sup Ct review denied

Authority of court under ORCP 32C to make determina­tion re­gard­ing class certifica­tion condi­tional is consistent with court duty to determine arbitrability issue "summarily". Greene v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 228 Or App 379, 209 P3d 333 (2009), Sup Ct review denied

Notes of Decisions

Uniform Arbitra­tion Act applies to ac­tions filed on or after January 1, 2004, re­gard­ing agree­ment to arbitrate, regardless of date of agree­ment. Martin v. Comcast of California, 209 Or App 82, 146 P3d 380 (2006)

Uniform Arbitra­tion Act applies to any arbitra­tion agree­ment regardless of when arbitrating parties entered into agree­ment. Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. PacifiCorp, 240 Or App 124, 245 P3d 685 (2010)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 36—Mediation and Arbitration, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors036.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 36, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano036.­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.