Tag Archives: probate

Oregon Vital Records Free of Charge to those Affected by Wildfires

Posted on by
3

From the Oregon Health Authority:

Many Oregon families may have lost all vital documents due to the wildfires. Family members may also have died in the wildfires. Under a new temporary rule, up to three certified copies of Oregon vital records will be provided free of charge if requested in connection with Executive Order 20-35. This new rule will remain in effect until March 1, 2021.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this mean?

The State Vital Records office will provide up to three (3) certified copies of a birth, death, marriage, divorce, domestic partnership or dissolution of domestic partnership free of charge if the record is requested in connection with Executive Order 20-35 related to wildfire response. The Executive Order only applies to fires that occurred in Oregon.

County Vital Records offices will provide up to three (3) certified copies of death or birth records free of charge if the record is requested in connection with Executive Order 20-35 related to wildfire response.  

When does the fee waiver go into effect?

The fee waiver goes into effect September 14, 2020 and will remain in effect until March 1, 2021.

How do individuals get the vital records fees waived?

When ordering the certified copies of the vital record, the person ordering the certificates must state the reason for needing the record as “Executive Order 20-35” or “Oregon 2020 Wildfires”. It is important that this information is noted on the order so the fee can be waived appropriately. See link for ordering information.

What happens if I order by mail?

Complete and sign the order form. State the reason for needing the record as “Executive Order 20-35” or “Oregon 2020 Wildfires”. It is important that this information is noted on the order so we know why a fee is not included. Provide identification as required. We may request additional documentation if it appears the request for records is not in connection with the wildfires.   

What happens if I order over the Internet or by phone?

If you are ordering via the Internet or phone, you will need to pay the entire fee upon ordering. The certificate fee will be refunded once the order is received by the Center for Health Statistics. State the reason for needing the record as “Executive Order 20-35” or “Oregon 2020 Wildfires” when completing the order. It is important that this information is noted on the order so the certificate fee can be waived appropriately, and a refund submitted. We may request additional documentation if it appears the request for records is not in connection with the wildfires.

County Vital Records offices will provide up to three (3) certified copies of death or birth records free of charge if the record is requested in connection with Executive Order 20-35 related to wildfire response.  

Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets – What Does It Mean to You?

Posted on by
Reply

Maybe you recall these headlines:

The Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act aims to solve this problem for fiduciaries – conservators, trustees, attorneys-in-fact, personal representatives, and the like.  For an overview, check out this post on FindLaw published yesterday.

If the RUFADDA is adopted in Oregon, suing Apple or Facebook should no longer be necessary. In the meanwhile, estate planning lawyers should talk to clients about this issue.  If you are drafting a will, trust, codicil, power of attorney, or similar document, instruct clients to create a “Digital Asset Instruction Sheet” so loved ones have direction on what to do and how to access these accounts.  A sample “Digital Asset Instruction Sheet” is available to Oregon lawyers on the PLF website, courtesy of Beate Weiss-Krull.

[All Rights Reserved 2016 Beverly Michaelis]

Is the Filing Fee Nightmare Over?

Posted on by
Reply

The OSB Court Fees Task Force has published an Initial Report with short term recommendations regarding 2009 HB 2287.  Having fielded many a call on this subject, I agree with the conclusion of the task force:  reform is badly needed.  The current fee structure is complex, confusing, and in some cases, unfair.  Here is an excerpt:

General Findings

  • The courts are a critically important, constitutionally mandated core function of government.
  • Courts must be open and accessible to all Oregonians.
  • The OSB’s highest legislative priority is open and accessible courts.
  • Keeping courts open and accessible requires stable and adequate funding.

Specific Findings

  • The current statutory fee structure is confusing and complex, even to experienced practitioners.
  • Any changes to the fee structure must not impede reasonable access to justice, including access by indigent persons, unrepresented litigants, and middle-income Oregonians.
  • The legislature should simplify the current fee structure to make it more predictable and more uniform.
  • Any changes to the fee system must maintain adequate funding for services critical to the justice system, such as Legal Aid services.
  • Some of the fees enacted in 2009 HB 2287 have created unintended and high transaction costs and/or unduly impaired access to justice, and should be modified or allowed to sunset.
  • Court-imposed financial obligations upon conviction of a crime or offense are an important part of the accountability process of the justice system.
  • Much of the liquidated and delinquent court-imposed debt cannot be collected and/or is owed to victims of crime, and does not represent a reasonable opportunity to increase revenue to the state or local governments.

Recommendations

  • Consolidate many existing fees that occur in the lifetime of a case (e.g., ex parte order and judgment fee, and fees for routine motions) into the filing and first response fees.
  • Enact consistent fee amounts for motions and other individual fees, so they are consistent within and among different types of cases.
  • Modify the following specific fees:
    • Sunset the $10 ex parte order and judgment fee. This fee imposes excessive administration costs on litigants and the courts.
    • Establish a statutory cap on fees in cases involving multiple parties and/or large prayer amounts. The current structure has created excessive fees in some cases.
    • Sunset the expunction fee in cases where an arrest occurred but no conviction resulted. Imposing a substantial fee in these cases does not reflect court workload and imposes an unfair burden on persons not convicted of a crime.
    • Restore a statutory limit on the amount retained from release security deposits, but at a higher limit than the previous $200 limit.
    • Modify the mediation/conciliation fee and law library fee to a fixed amount set by statute, rather than a percentage of the filing fee set by individual counties.
  • The legislature should encourage efficient, effective, and fair collection of court-imposed financial obligations, maintain long-term judgments for accountability, and develop a mechanism to classify and categorize debt that can reasonably be expected to be collected.

(Emphasis supplied.)

The report continues with findings and recommendations specific to probate, family law, civil practice, and criminal practice.

The reforms proposed by the OSB Court Fees Task Force will be welcomed by everyone – court staff, lawyers, and parties – all of whom have struggled with the fee structure created by HB 2287.

Copyright 2010 Beverly Michaelis