reglab/statecodes huggingface dataset:
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.260 - Rule 506. Member of clergy-penitent privilege.

(1) As used in this section, unless the context requires otherwise:
(a) "Confidential communication" means a communication made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.
(b) "Member of the clergy" means a minister of any church, religious denomination or organization or accredited Christian Science practitioner who in the course of the discipline or practice of that church, denomination or organization is authorized or accustomed to hearing confidential communications and, under the discipline or tenets of that church, denomination or organization, has a duty to keep such communications secret.
(2) A member of the clergy may not be examined as to any confidential communication made to the member of the clergy in the member’s professional character unless consent to the disclosure of the confidential communication is given by the person who made the communication.
(3) Even though the person who made the communication has given consent to the disclosure, a member of the clergy may not be examined as to any confidential communication made to the member in the member’s professional character if, under the discipline or tenets of the member’s church, denomination or organization, the member has an absolute duty to keep the communication confidential. [1981 c.892 §35; 1999 c.7 §1]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.262 - Rule 507. Counselor-client privilege.

A professional counselor or a marriage and family therapist licensed by the Oregon Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists under ORS 675.715 shall not be examined in a civil or criminal court proceeding as to any communication given the counselor or therapist by a client in the course of a noninvestigatory professional activity when such communication was given to enable the counselor or the therapist to aid the client, except:
(1) When the client or those persons legally responsible for the affairs of the client give consent to the disclosure. If both parties to a marriage have obtained marital and family therapy by a licensed marital and family therapist or a licensed counselor, the therapist or counselor shall not be competent to testify in a domestic relations action other than child custody action concerning information acquired in the course of the therapeutic relationship unless both parties consent;
(2) When the client initiates legal action or makes a complaint against the licensed professional counselor or licensed marriage and family therapist to the board;
(3) When the communication reveals the intent to commit a crime or harmful act; or
(4) When the communication reveals that a minor is or is suspected to be the victim of crime, abuse or neglect. [1989 c.721 §20]
Note:
40.262 was added to and made a part of 40.010 to 40.585 by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.265 - Rule 508a. Stenographer-employer privilege.

A stenographer shall not, without the consent of the stenographer’s employer, be examined as to any communication or dictation made by the employer to the stenographer in the course of professional employment. [1981 c.892 §36]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.272 - Rule 509-1. Sign language interpreter privilege.

(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Person with a disability" means a person who cannot readily understand or communicate the spoken English language, or cannot understand proceedings in which the person is involved, because of deafness or because of a physical hearing impairment or cannot communicate in the proceedings because of a physical speaking impairment.
(b) "Sign language interpreter" or "interpreter" means a person who translates conversations or other communications for a person with a disability or translates the statements of a person with a disability.
(2) A person with a disability has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent a sign language interpreter from disclosing any communications to which the person with a disability was a party that were made while the interpreter was providing interpretation services for the person with a disability. The privilege created by this section extends only to those communications between a person with a disability and another, and translated by the interpreter, that would otherwise be privileged under ORS 40.225 to 40.295. [1993 c.179 §2; 2007 c.70 §11]
Note:
40.272 was added to and made a part of 40.225 to 40.295 by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.273 - Rule 509-2. Non-English-speaking person-interpreter privilege.

(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Interpreter" means a person who translates conversations or other communications for a non-English-speaking person or translates the statements of a non-English-speaking person.
(b) "Non-English-speaking person" means a person who, by reason of place of birth or culture, speaks a language other than English and does not speak English with adequate ability to communicate in the proceedings.
(2) A non-English-speaking person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent an interpreter from disclosing any communications to which the non-English-speaking person was a party that were made while the interpreter was providing interpretation services for the non-English-speaking person. The privilege created by this section extends only to those communications between a non-English-speaking person and another, and translated by the interpreter, that would otherwise be privileged under ORS 40.225 to 40.295. [1993 c.179 §3]
Note:
40.273 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 40 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.280 - Rule 511. Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure.

A person upon whom ORS 40.225 to 40.295 confer a privilege against disclosure of the confidential matter or communication waives the privilege if the person or the person’s predecessor while holder of the privilege voluntarily discloses or consents to disclosure of any significant part of the matter or communication. This section does not apply if the disclosure is itself a privileged communication. Voluntary disclosure does not occur with the mere commencement of litigation or, in the case of a deposition taken for the purpose of perpetuating testimony, until the offering of the deposition as evidence. Voluntary disclosure does not occur when representatives of the news media are allowed to attend executive sessions of the governing body of a public body as provided in ORS 192.660 (4), or when representatives of the news media disclose information after the governing body has prohibited disclosure of the information under ORS 192.660 (4). Voluntary disclosure does not occur when a public body, as defined in ORS 192.311, discloses information or records in response to a written request for public records made under ORS 192.311 to 192.478. Voluntary disclosure does occur, as to psychotherapists in the case of a mental or emotional condition and physicians in the case of a physical condition upon the holder’s offering of any person as a witness who testifies as to the condition. [1981 c.892 §39; 2003 c.259 §1; 2017 c.456 §9]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.285 - Rule 512. Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim privilege.

Evidence of a statement or other disclosure of privileged matter is not admissible against the holder of the privilege if the disclosure was:
(1) Compelled erroneously; or
(2) Made without opportunity to claim the privilege. [1981 c.892 §40]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.290 - Rule 513. Comment upon or inference from claim of privilege.

(1) The claim of a privilege, whether in the present proceeding or upon a prior occasion, is not a proper subject of comment by judge or counsel. No inference may be drawn from a claim of privilege.
(2) In jury cases, proceedings shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to facilitate the making of claims of privilege without the knowledge of the jury.
(3) Upon request, any party against whom the jury might draw an adverse inference from a claim of privilege is entitled to an instruction that no inference may be drawn therefrom. [1981 c.892 §41]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.295 - Rule 514. Effect on existing privileges.

Unless expressly repealed by section 98, chapter 892, Oregon Laws 1981, all existing privileges either created under the Constitution or statutes of the State of Oregon or developed by the courts of Oregon are recognized and shall continue to exist until changed or repealed according to law. [1981 c.892 §42]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.310 - Rule 601. General rule of competency.

Except as provided in ORS 40.310 to 40.335, any person who, having organs of sense can perceive, and perceiving can make known the perception to others, may be a witness. [1981 c.892 §43]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.315 - Rule 602. Lack of personal knowledge.

Subject to the provisions of ORS 40.415, a witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the testimony of the witness. [1981 c.892 §44]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.320 - Rule 603. Oath or affirmation.

(1) Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that the witness will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken the conscience of the witness and impress the mind of the witness with the duty to do so.
(2) An oath may be administered as follows: The person who swears holds up one hand while the person administering the oath asks: "Under penalty of perjury, do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give in the issue (or matter) now pending between _____ and _____ shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" If the oath is administered to any other than a witness, the same form and manner may be used. The person swearing must answer in an affirmative manner.
(3) An affirmation may be administered as follows: The person who affirms holds up one hand while the person administering the affirmation asks: "Under penalty of perjury, do you promise that the evidence you shall give in the issue (or matter) now pending between _____ and _____ shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?" If the affirmation is administered to any other than a witness, the same form and manner may be used. The person affirming must answer in an affirmative manner. [1981 c.892 §45]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.325 - Rule 604. Interpreters.

Except as provided in ORS 45.275 (7), an interpreter is subject to the provisions of the Oregon Evidence Code relating to qualification as an expert and the administration of an oath or affirmation that the interpreter will make a true and impartial interpretation of the proceedings in an understandable manner using the interpreter’s best skills and judgment in accordance with the standards and ethics of the interpreter profession. [1981 c.892 §47; 1981 s.s. c.3 §138; 1989 c.224 §7; 1991 c.750 §7; 2001 c.242 §4; 2005 c.385 §3; 2015 c.155 §5]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.335 - Rule 606. Competency of juror as witness.

A member of the jury may not testify as a witness before that jury in the trial of the case in which the member has been sworn to sit as a juror. If the juror is called so to testify, the opposing party shall be afforded an opportunity to object out of the presence of the jury. [1981 c.892 §49]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.350 - Rule 608. Evidence of character and conduct of witness.

(1) The credibility of a witness may be attacked or supported by evidence in the form of opinion or reputation, but:
(a) The evidence may refer only to character for truthfulness or untruthfulness; and
(b) Evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the character of the witness for truthfulness has been attacked by opinion or reputation evidence or otherwise.
(2) Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the credibility of the witness, other than conviction of crime as provided in ORS 40.355, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. Further, such specific instances of conduct may not, even if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness. [1981 c.892 §52]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.360 - Rule 609-1. Impeachment for bias or interest.

(1) The credibility of a witness may be attacked by evidence that the witness engaged in conduct or made statements showing bias or interest. In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the statement shall be shown or disclosed to the opposing party.
(2) If a witness fully admits the facts claimed to show the bias or interest of the witness, additional evidence of that bias or interest shall not be admitted. If the witness denies or does not fully admit the facts claimed to show bias or interest, the party attacking the credibility of the witness may then offer evidence to prove those facts.
(3) Evidence to support or rehabilitate a witness whose credibility has been attacked by evidence of bias or interest shall be limited to evidence showing a lack of bias or interest. [1981 c.892 §54; 1999 c.100 §1]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.365 - Rule 610. Religious beliefs or opinions.

Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the credibility of the witness is impaired or enhanced. [1981 c.892 §54a]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.370 - Rule 611. Mode and order of interrogation and presentation.

(1) The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, avoid needless consumption of time and protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
(2) Cross-examination should be limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness. The court may, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.
(3) Leading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop the witness’ testimony. Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions. [1981 c.892 §54b]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.375 - Rule 612. Writing used to refresh memory.

If a witness uses a writing to refresh memory for the purpose of testifying, either while testifying or before testifying if the court in its discretion determines it is necessary in the interests of justice, an adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to introduce into evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness. If it is claimed that the writing contains matters not related to the subject matter of the testimony, the court shall examine the writing in camera, excise any portions not so related, and order delivery of the remainder to the party entitled thereto. Any portion withheld over objections shall be preserved and made available to the appellate court in the event of an appeal. If a writing is not produced or delivered pursuant to order under this section, the court shall make any order justice requires, except that in criminal cases when the prosecution elects not to comply the order shall be one striking the testimony or, if the court in its discretion determines that the interests of justice so require, declaring a mistrial. [1981 c.892 §55]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.380 - Rule 613. Prior statements of witnesses.

(1) In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the same shall be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel.
(2) Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate the witness thereon, or the interests of justice otherwise require. This provision does not apply to admissions of a party-opponent as defined in ORS 40.450. [1981 c.892 §55a; 1983 c.433 §2; 1983 c.740 §5]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.385 - Rule 615. Exclusion of witnesses.

At the request of a party the court may order witnesses excluded until the time of final argument, and it may make the order of its own motion. This rule does not authorize exclusion of:
(1) A party who is a natural person;
(2) An officer or employee of a party which is not a natural person designated as its representative by its attorney;
(3) A person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of the party’s cause; or
(4) The victim in a criminal case. [1981 c.892 §56; 1987 c.2 §5; 2003 c.14 §20]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.405 - Rule 701. Opinion testimony by lay witnesses.

If the witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony of the witness in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are:
(1) Rationally based on the perception of the witness; and
(2) Helpful to a clear understanding of testimony of the witness or the determination of a fact in issue. [1981 c.892 §57]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.410 - Rule 702. Testimony by experts.

If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise. [1981 c.892 §58]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.415 - Rule 703. Bases of opinion testimony by experts.

The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence. [1981 c.892 §59]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.425 - Rule 705. Disclosure of fact or data underlying expert opinion.

An expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the court requires otherwise. The expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination. [1981 c.892 §61]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.430 - Rule 706. Impeachment of expert witness by learned treatise.

Upon cross-examination, an expert witness may be questioned concerning statements contained in a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, medicine or other science or art if the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is established as a reliable authority. A treatise, periodical or pamphlet may be established as a reliable authority by the testimony or admission of the witness, by other expert testimony or by judicial notice. Statements contained in a treatise, periodical or pamphlet established as a reliable authority may be used for purposes of impeachment but may not be introduced as substantive evidence. [1999 c.85 §2]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.450 - Rule 801. Definitions for ORS 40.450 to 40.475.

As used in ORS 40.450 to 40.475, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) A "statement" is:
(a) An oral or written assertion; or
(b) Nonverbal conduct of a person, if intended as an assertion.
(2) A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement.
(3) "Hearsay" is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
(4) A statement is not hearsay if:
(a) The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and the statement:
(A) Is inconsistent with the testimony of the witness and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing or other proceeding, or in a deposition;
(B) Is consistent with the testimony of the witness and is offered to rebut an inconsistent statement or an express or implied charge against the witness of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive;
(C) Is one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or
(D) Purports to interpret an otherwise admissible statement made by another person from one language into another.
(b) The statement is offered against a party and is:
(A) That party’s own statement, in either an individual or a representative capacity;
(B) A statement of which the party has manifested the party’s adoption or belief in its truth;
(C) A statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject;
(D) A statement by the party’s agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship; or
(E) A statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
(c) The statement is made in a deposition taken in the same proceeding pursuant to ORCP 39 I. [1981 c.892 §62; 1987 c.275 §3; 2019 c.306 §1]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.470 - Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay.

Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under ORS 40.455 if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception set forth in ORS 40.460 or 40.465. [1981 c.892 §66]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.475 - Rule 806. Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant.

When a hearsay statement, or a statement defined in ORS 40.450 (4)(b)(C), (D) or (E), has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked, and if attacked may be supported, by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement or conduct by the declarant at any time, inconsistent with the hearsay statement of the declarant, is not subject to any requirement under ORS 40.380 relating to impeachment by evidence of inconsistent statements. If the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party is entitled to examine the declarant on the statement as if under cross-examination. [1981 c.892 §67]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.505 - Rule 901. Requirement of authentication or identification.

(1) The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.
(2) By way of illustration only, and not by way of limitation, the following are examples of authentication or identification conforming with the requirements of subsection (1) of this section:
(a) Testimony by a witness with knowledge that a matter is what it is claimed to be.
(b) Nonexpert opinion as to the genuineness of handwriting, based upon familiarity not acquired for purposes of the litigation.
(c) Comparison by the trier of fact or by expert witnesses with specimens which have been authenticated.
(d) Appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns or other distinctive characteristics, taken in conjunction with circumstances.
(e) Identification of a voice, whether heard firsthand or through mechanical or electronic transmission or recording, by opinion based upon hearing the voice at any time under circumstances connecting it with the alleged speaker.
(f) Telephone conversations, by evidence that a call was made to the number assigned at the time by the telephone company to a particular person or business, if:
(A) In the case of a person, circumstances, including self-identification, show the person answering to be the one called; or
(B) In the case of a business, the call was made to a place of business and the conversation related to business reasonably transacted over the telephone.
(g) Evidence that a writing authorized by law to be recorded or filed and in fact recorded or filed in a public office, or a purported public record, report, statement, or data compilation, in any form, is from the public office where items of this nature are kept.
(h) Evidence that a document or data compilation, in any form:
(A) Is in such condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity;
(B) Was in a place where it, if authentic, would likely be; and
(C) Has been in existence 20 years or more at the time it is offered.
(i) Evidence describing a process or system used to produce a result and showing that the process or system produces an accurate result.
(j) Any method of authentication or identification otherwise provided by law or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court. [1981 c.892 §68]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.550 - Rule 1001. Definitions for ORS 40.550 to 40.585.

As used in ORS 40.550 to 40.585, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) "Duplicate" means a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, by mechanical or electronic re-recording, by chemical reproduction, by optical imaging or by other equivalent techniques that accurately reproduce the original, including reproduction by facsimile machines if the reproduction is identified as a facsimile and printed on nonthermal paper.
(2) "Original" of a writing or recording is the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An "original" of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom. If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an "original."
(3) "Photographs" includes still photographs, X-ray films, video tapes and motion pictures.
(4) "Writings" and "recordings" mean letters, words or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, magnetic impulse, optical imaging, mechanical or electronic recording or other form of data compilation. [1981 c.892 §71; 1991 c.857 §1; 1995 c.760 §1]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.555 - Rule 1002. Requirement of original.

To prove the content of a writing, recording or photograph, the original writing, recording or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in ORS 40.550 to 40.585 or other law. [1981 c.892 §72]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.560 - Rule 1003. Admissibility of duplicates.

A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless:
(1) A genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original; or
(2) In the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. [1981 c.892 §73]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.562 - Rule 1003-1. Admissibility of reproduction.

(1) If any business, institution or member of a profession or calling, in the regular course of business or activity, has kept or recorded any memorandum, writing, entry, print, representation or a combination thereof, of any act, transaction, occurrence or event, and in the regular course of business has caused any or all of the same to be recorded, copied or reproduced by any photographic, photostatic, microfilm, micro-card, miniature photographic, optical imaging or other process that accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for so reproducing the original, the original may be destroyed in the regular course of business unless held in a custodial or fiduciary capacity and the principal or true owner has not authorized destruction or unless its preservation is required by law. Such reproduction, when satisfactorily identified, is as admissible in evidence as the original itself in any judicial or administrative proceeding whether the original is in existence or not and an enlargement or facsimile of such reproduction is likewise admissible in evidence if the original reproduction is in existence and available for inspection under direction of the court. The introduction of a reproduced record, enlargement or facsimile does not preclude admission of the original.
(2) If any department or agency of government, in the regular course of business or activity, has kept or recorded any memorandum, writing, entry, print, representation or combination thereof, of any act, transaction, occurrence or event, and in the regular course of business, and in accordance with ORS 192.040 to 192.060 and 192.105, has caused any or all of the same to be recorded, copied or reproduced by any photographic, photostatic, microfilm, micro-card, miniature photographic, optical imaging or other process that accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for so reproducing the original, the original may be destroyed in the regular course of business unless held in a custodial or fiduciary capacity and the principal or true owner has not authorized destruction or unless its preservation is required by law. Such reproduction, when satisfactorily identified, is as admissible in evidence as the original itself in any judicial or administrative proceeding whether the original is in existence or not and an enlargement or facsimile of such reproduction is likewise admissible in evidence if the original reproduction is in existence and available for inspection under direction of the court. The introduction of a reproduced record, enlargement or facsimile does not preclude admission of the original. [1995 c.760 §3]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.565 - Rule 1004. Admissibility of other evidence of contents.

The original is not required, and other evidence of the contents of a writing, recording or photograph is admissible when:
(1) All originals are lost or have been destroyed, unless the proponent lost or destroyed them in bad faith;
(2) An original cannot be obtained by any available judicial process or procedure;
(3) At a time when an original was under the control of the party against whom offered, that party was put on notice, by the pleadings or otherwise, that the contents would be a subject of proof at the hearing, and the party does not produce the original at the hearing; or
(4) The writing, recording or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue. [1981 c.892 §74]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.570 - Rule 1005. Public records.

The contents of an official record or of a document authorized to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed, including data compilations in any form, if otherwise admissible, may be proved by copy, certified as correct in accordance with ORS 40.510 or testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If such a copy cannot be obtained by the exercise of reasonable diligence, then other evidence of the contents may be given. [1981 c.892 §75; 1983 c.433 §3]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.575 - Rule 1006. Summaries.

The contents of voluminous writings, recordings or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in court may be presented in the form of a chart, summary or calculation. The originals, or duplicates, shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. The court may order that they be produced in court. [1981 c.892 §76]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.580 - Rule 1007. Testimony or written admission of party.

Contents of writings, recordings or photographs may be proved by the testimony or deposition of the party against whom offered or by the party’s written admission, without accounting for the nonproduction of the original. [1981 c.892 §77]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 040 - Evidence Code › Section 40.585 - Rule 1008. Functions of court and jury.

When the admissibility of other evidence of contents of writings, recordings or photographs under ORS 40.550 to 40.585 depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the question whether the condition has been fulfilled is ordinarily for the court to determine in accordance with ORS 40.030. However, the issue is for the trier of fact to determine as in the case of other issues of fact when the issue raised is:
(1) Whether the asserted writing ever existed;
(2) Whether another writing, recording or photograph produced at the trial is the original; or
(3) Whether the other evidence of contents correctly reflects the contents. [1981 c.892 §78]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.270 - Proof of usage.

(1) Usage shall be proved by the testimony of at least two witnesses.
(2) Evidence may be given of usage to explain the true character of an act, contract or instrument when such true character is not otherwise plain, but usage is never admissible except as a means of interpretation. [Amended by 1981 c.892 §86]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.415 - Photograph of victim in prosecution for criminal homicide.

In a prosecution for any criminal homicide, a photograph of the victim while alive shall be admissible evidence when offered by the district attorney to show the general appearance and condition of the victim while alive. [1987 c.2 §8]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.500 - "Secondary evidence" defined for ORS 41.500 to 41.580.

As used in ORS 41.500 to 41.580, "secondary evidence" means a copy, or oral evidence, of an original writing or object. [1981 c.892 §81]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.530 - Evidence of representations as to third persons.

No evidence is admissible to charge a person upon a representation as to the credit, skill or character of a third person, unless the representation, or some memorandum thereof, be in writing, and either subscribed by or in the handwriting of the party to be charged.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.660 - Admissibility of objects cognizable by the senses.

Whenever an object, cognizable by the senses, has such a relation to the fact in dispute as to afford reasonable grounds of belief respecting it, or to make an item in the sum of the evidence, the object may be exhibited to the jury, or its existence, situation and character may be proved by witnesses. The exhibition of the object to the jury shall be regulated by the sound discretion of the court.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.675 - Inadmissibility of certain data provided to peer review body of health care providers and health care groups.

(1) As used in this section, "peer review body" includes tissue committees, governing bodies or committees including medical staff committees of a health care facility licensed under ORS chapter 441, medical staff committees of the Department of Corrections and similar committees of professional societies, a health care service contractor as defined in ORS 750.005, an emergency medical service provider as defined in ORS 41.685 or any other medical group or provider of medical services in connection with bona fide medical research, quality assurance, utilization review, credentialing, education, training, supervision or discipline of physicians or other health care providers or in connection with the grant, denial, restriction or termination of clinical privileges at a health care facility. "Peer review body" also includes utilization review and peer review organizations.
(2) As used in subsection (3) of this section, "data" means all oral communications or written reports to a peer review body, and all notes or records created by or at the direction of a peer review body, including the communications, reports, notes or records created in the course of an investigation undertaken at the direction of a peer review body.
(3) All data shall be privileged and shall not be admissible in evidence in any judicial, administrative, arbitration or mediation proceeding. This section shall not affect the admissibility in evidence of records dealing with a patient’s care and treatment, other than data or information obtained through service on, or as an agent for, a peer review body.
(4) A person serving on or communicating information to any peer review body or person conducting an investigation described in subsection (1) of this section shall not be examined as to any communication to or from, or the findings of, that peer review body or person.
(5) A person serving on or communicating information to any peer review body or person conducting an investigation described in subsection (1) of this section shall not be subject to an action for civil damages for affirmative actions taken or statements made in good faith.
(6) Subsection (3) of this section shall not apply to proceedings in which a health care practitioner contests the denial, restriction or termination of clinical privileges by a health care facility or the denial, restriction or termination of membership in a professional society or any other health care group. However, any data disclosed in those proceedings shall not be admissible in any other judicial, administrative, arbitration or mediation proceeding. [1963 c.181 §1; 1971 c.412 §1; 1975 c.796 §11; 1977 c.448 §9; 1981 c.806 §1; 1991 c.225 §1; 1995 c.485 §1; 1997 c.791 §6; 1997 c.792 §§29,29a]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.685 - Inadmissibility of certain data relating to emergency medical services system.

(1) All data shall be privileged and are not public records as defined in ORS 192.311 and shall not be admissible in evidence in any judicial proceeding except as provided under ORS 676.175. However, nothing in this section affects the admissibility in evidence of a party’s medical records dealing with a party’s medical care.
(2) On request, an emergency medical service provider shall submit data not subject to ORS 676.175 to any committee or governing body of the county, counties or state as provided for by state or county administrative rule.
(3) A person serving on or communicating information to any governing body or committee shall not be examined as to any communication to that body or committee or the findings thereof.
(4) A person serving on or communicating information to any governing body or committee shall not be subject to an action for civil damages for affirmative actions taken or statements made in good faith.
(5) As used in this section:
(a) "Committee or governing body" means any committee or governing body that has authority to undertake an evaluation of an emergency medical services system as part of a quality assurance program and includes any committee of an emergency medical service provider undertaking a quality assurance program.
(b) "Data" means all oral communications or written reports, notes or records provided to, or prepared by or for, a committee or governing body that are part of an evaluation of an emergency medical services system and includes any information submitted by any health care provider relating to training, supervision, performance evaluation or professional competency.
(c) "Emergency medical service provider" means any public, private or volunteer entity providing prehospital functions and services that are required to prepare for and respond to medical emergencies including rescue, ambulance, treatment, communication and evaluation.
(d) "Emergency medical services system" means those prehospital functions and services that are required to prepare for and respond to medical emergencies, including rescue, ambulance, treatment, communication and evaluation. [1989 c.1079 §1; 1997 c.791 §7; 1997 c.792 §30]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.740 - Parol evidence rule.

When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing by the parties, it is to be considered as containing all those terms, and therefore there can be, between the parties and their representatives or successors in interest, no evidence of the terms of the agreement, other than the contents of the writing, except where a mistake or imperfection of the writing is put in issue by the pleadings or where the validity of the agreement is the fact in dispute. However this section does not exclude other evidence of the circumstances under which the agreement was made, or to which it relates, as defined in ORS 42.220, or to explain an ambiguity, intrinsic or extrinsic, or to establish illegality or fraud. The term "agreement" includes deeds and wills as well as contracts between parties.
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.815 - Evidence of compliance with or attempt to comply with ORCP 32 I; when admissible.

Attempts to comply with the provisions of ORCP 32 I by a person receiving a demand shall be construed to be an offer to compromise and shall be inadmissible as evidence. Such attempts to comply with a demand shall not be considered an admission of engaging in the act or practice alleged to be unlawful nor of the unlawfulness of that act. Evidence of compliance or attempts to comply with the provisions of ORCP 32 I may be introduced by a defendant for the purpose of establishing good faith or to show compliance with the provisions of ORCP 32 I. [Formerly 13.310; 1981 c.912 §3]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.905 - Admissibility in subsequent civil action of procedures in traffic crimes.

A plea to a charge of a traffic crime, as defined in ORS 801.545, and any judgment of conviction or acquittal of a person charged with a traffic crime, as defined by ORS 801.545, are not admissible in the trial of a subsequent civil action arising out of the same accident or occurrence to prove or negate the facts upon which such judgment was rendered. [1975 c.542 §1; 1981 c.892 §87; 1999 c.1051 §242; 2007 c.784 §6; 2011 c.597 §30]
2023 Oregon Revised Statutes › Volume : 01 - Courts, Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure › Chapter 041 - Evidence Generally › Section 41.910 - Certain intercepted communications inadmissible.

Evidence of the contents of any wire or oral communication intercepted:
(1) In violation of ORS 165.540 shall not be admissible in any court of this state, except as evidence of unlawful interception or when the evidence was created by the use of a video camera worn upon a law enforcement officer’s person and the officer either substantially complied with or attempted in good faith to comply with ORS 165.540 (5)(d)(B).
(2) Under ORS 165.540 (2)(a) shall not be admissible in any court of this state unless:
(a) The communication was intercepted by a public official in charge of and at a jail, police premises, sheriff’s office, Department of Corrections institution or other penal or correctional institution; and
(b) The participant in the communication, against whom the evidence is being offered, had actual notice that the communication was being monitored or recorded. [1955 c.675 §6; 1959 c.681 §5; 1979 c.716 §12; 1983 c.824 §4; 1993 c.178 §1; 2001 c.385 §5; 2015 c.550 §3]