C.R. v. Gannon

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Attorney Fees
  • Date Filed: 09-14-2016
  • Case #: A156763
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Ortega, P.J. for the Court; DeVore, J.; & Garrett, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

A hearing that is held “pursuant to” ORS 107.718(10) is a hearing where parties have an opportunity to be heard on the issues of law or fact that are placed before the court, which are limited to the legal or factual issues related to the relief available to a petitioner in ORS 107.718(1).

Respondent appealed a supplemental judgment denying him attorney fees and costs. Petitioner sought a restraining order. (ORS 107.710). The trial court granted the order after an ex parte hearing. (ORS 107.718(1)). Respondent requested a hearing (ORS 107.718(10)) to contest the factual basis of the restraining order; the hearing was held December 16, 2014, during which Petitioner asked the court to dismiss the petition and restraining order without prejudice and without an award of fees and costs. The court dismissed but postponed ruling on fees and costs until Respondent submitted a petition. Respondent filed his petition, but the court denied it, concluding because the December 16th hearing was not a contested hearing on the evidence concerning the restraining order, the court did not make a finding on the evidence, and consequently there was no legal basis to award fees. Respondent appealed, arguing the trial court could award attorney fees under 107.716(3). The Court held that a hearing held pursuant to 107.718(10) is a hearing where parties have an opportunity to be heard on the issues of law or fact that are placed before the court in the requested hearing, limited to the relief available to a petitioner in ORS 107.718(1), which includes temporary custody orders, a restraining order, and other relief necessary to provide for the safety and welfare of the petitioner. Because the December 16th hearing did not reach any of the ORS 107.718(1) issues, the court did not hold a hearing pursuant to ORS 107.718(10) and correctly concluded it lacked authority to award attorney fees. Affirmed.

 

Advanced Search