74th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2007 Regular Session
 
NOTE:  Matter within  { +  braces and plus signs + } in an
amended section is new. Matter within  { -  braces and minus
signs - } is existing law to be omitted. New sections are within
 { +  braces and plus signs + } .
 
LC 1032
 
                           B-Engrossed
 
                         House Bill 2324
                  Ordered by the Senate May 29
 Including House Amendments dated April 30 and Senate Amendments
                          dated May 29
 
Ordered printed by the Speaker pursuant to House Rule 12.00A (5).
  Presession filed (at the request of House Interim Committee on
  Judiciary)
 
 
                             SUMMARY
 
The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
brief statement of the essential features of the measure.
 
  Allows court to render judgment on action challenging
constitutionality or legality of policy, practice or act of
public body even though policy, practice or act no longer has
effect on party bringing action if court determines challenged
act is capable of repetition and likely to evade judicial review
in future.
 
                        A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to courts.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
  SECTION 1.  { + In any action in which a party alleges that an
act, policy or practice of a public body, as defined in ORS
174.109, or of any officer, employee or agent of a public body,
as defined in ORS 174.109, is unconstitutional or is otherwise
contrary to law, the party may continue to prosecute the action
and the court may issue a judgment on the validity of the
challenged act, policy or practice even though the specific act,
policy or practice giving rise to the action no longer has a
practical effect on the party if the court determines that:
  (1) The party had standing to commence the action;
  (2) The act challenged by the party is capable of repetition,
or the policy or practice challenged by the party continues in
effect; and
  (3) The challenged policy or practice, or similar acts, are
likely to evade judicial review in the future. + }
                         ----------