Opinion ID: 1119171
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: saif corporation is subject to the provisions of ors chapter 180

Text: ORS chapter 180 contains comprehensive statutes governing the duties and responsibilities of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice. ORS 180.060 describes in a general way the duties of the Attorney General. The powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Department of Justice and specified state entities, insofar as the state's legal affairs are concerned, are specifically defined in ORS 180.220 and 180.230. ORS 180.220: (1) The Department of Justice shall have: (a) General control and supervision of all civil actions and legal proceedings in which the State of Oregon may be a party or may be interested. (b) Full charge and control of all the legal business of all departments, commissions and bureaus of the state, or of any office thereof, which requires the services of an attorney or counsel in order to protect the interests of the state. (2) No state officer, board, commission, or the head of a department or institution of the state shall employ or be represented by any other counsel or attorney at law. (3) This section is subject to ORS 767.875. ORS 180.230: No compensation shall be allowed to any person for services as an attorney or counselor to any department of the state government or to the head thereof, or to any board or commission, except in cases specially authorized by law. ORS 180.220 refers to seven state entities: departments, commissions, bureaus, offices thereof, state officers, boards, and heads of departments or institutions. Even though ORS chapter 180 makes no specific reference to an independent public corporation, [3] we are convinced that SAIF Corporation is subject to its provisions. ORS 180.220 descends from Oregon Laws 1947, chapter 556. Section 2 of that law provided: The department of justice shall have general control and supervision of all civil actions and legal proceedings in which the state of Oregon may be a party or may be interested, and have full charge and control of all the legal business of all departments, commissions and bureaus of the state, or of any office thereof, which requires the services of an attorney or counsel in order to protect the interests of the state. No state officer, board, commission, or the head of a department or institution of the state shall employ or be represented by any other counsel or attorney at law. As does ORS 180.220, that law referred to departments, commissions, bureaus, offices thereof, state officers, boards and heads of departments or institutions. The most likely conclusion is that those seven terms were not intended to be by way of limitation, but by way of description, to generally describe the activities of the entity the State of Oregon. No exceptions were provided for. The only specific statutory exception to the broad language now found in ORS 180.220(1) and (2) was enacted in 1967, Or. Laws 1967, ch. 178, § 3, and is found in ORS 180.220(3). It grants specific authority to the Public Utility Commissioner to employ a collection agency to collect fees, taxes and penalties due the state. The specific limitation of ORS 180.220(2), coupled with the exception contained in ORS 180.220(3), compels the conclusion that all of the state's legal affairs, whether included within the term civil actions and legal proceedings of ORS 180.220(1)(a) or within the term legal business of ORS 180.220(1)(b), remain under the charge, control and supervision of the Department of Justice. If the legislature intended that SAIF Corporation was not subject to ORS chapter 180, it likely would have made specific exemption for it. The 1979 legislative history reinforces this conclusion. The State Compensation Department (which later became SAIF) had been created in 1965 for the purpose of transacting workers' compensation insurance business formerly transacted by the State Industrial Accident Commission. ORS 656.752(1), 1977 Replacement Part; see Or. Laws 1965, ch. 285, § 55. By passing Oregon Laws 1979, chapter 829, § 5, the legislature created a new entity, the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation, an independent public corporation, whose stated function and purpose was identical to that of the former SAIF  for the purpose of transacting workers' compensation insurance business formerly transacted by the State Industrial Accident Commission. The 1979 law made few changes in the method of operation. It provided for a board of directors to establish the policies for the operation of [SAIF Corporation] consistent with all applicable provisions of law. Or. Laws 1979, ch. 829, § 2(7). The SAIF Corporation's manager, formerly appointed by the governor, was to be appointed by the board. Id. § 6. With one exception, which is discussed below, these are the only significant changes resulting from the 1979 legislation. [4] The legislative history is extremely vague as to why an independent public corporation was created. As originally proposed, SB 255 created a State Accident Insurance Fund Commission. Later the decision was made to create an independent public corporation. Minutes, Senate Committee on Labor, Consumer and Business Affairs, February 2, 1979, page 3. It is clear that during the 1979 session, the legislature considered and made specific provision for exemption from Oregon statutes to which SAIF previously was subject. These exemptions are now found in ORS 656.753(1). [5] Had the legislature intended that SAIF Corporation not be subject to ORS chapter 180, it likely would have included chapter 180 with the other exemptions enumerated in ORS 656.753(1), for the opportunity was, without any doubt, present. Such an exemption was proposed. Senate Bill 255 was amended by the Senate Committee on Labor Consumer and Business Affairs on February 8, 1979. Section 2 was amended to create the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation. Section 4 was broadened, to exempt SAIF from all of the provisions of ORS chapters 240, 279, 282, 283, 291, 292, and 293. Section 6 of the amended bill added a new subsection (4) to ORS 656.754 which read: (4) Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS chapter 180, the manager may employ attorneys to perform such legal services as may be required in the administration of the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation. Senate Amendments to Senate Bill 255, February 8, 1979; see A-Engrossed Senate Bill 255 (1979). On May 2, 1979, the committee further amended SB 255. The authorization to employ attorneys notwithstanding ORS chapter 180 was deleted. The section 4 exemptions from other provisions of law applicable to other state agencies remained. Senate Amendments to Senate Bill 255, May 2, 1979. See B-Engrossed Senate Bill 255 (1979). The deletion of authorization to employ attorneys appears to have been called to the attention of the members of the Senate by a staff memorandum analyzing B-Engrossed SB 255, as follows: Effect of committee amendments   . Disallows the SAIF Corporation from employing its own attorneys. Staff Measure Analysis, Exhibit File, SB 255 (1979). As finally enacted, the measure contained the section 4 exemptions mentioned, and did not contain any exemption from the provisions of ORS chapter 180. Enrolled Senate Bill 255 (1979). [6] This legislative history is significant. It rebuts SAIF Corporation's claim that the conversion of SAIF to an independent public corporation takes SAIF Corporation out from ORS chapter 180. [7] There is no whisper of evidence that the legislature intended otherwise. Although ORS 180.060(8) provides that [t]he Attorney General shall not appear on behalf of any officer, department, agency, board or commission without its consent in any action, suit, matter, cause or proceeding in any court   , it is not inconsistent with our conclusion. The fact that ORS 180.060(8) prohibits the Attorney General from appearing on behalf of an entity of government without its consent does not by implication authorize the entity to employ its own counsel, nor is ORS 180.060(8) inconsistent with the prohibition contained in ORS 180.220(2). See also ORS 180.060(5), which provides that [t]he Attorney General shall, when requested, perform all legal services for the state or any department or officer of the state. Our conclusion is supported by the decision of this court in Gibson v. Kay, 68 Or. 589, 137 P. 864 (1914). In Gibson, the Corporation Commissioner hired an attorney, Claude McColloch, as a special assistant. After McColloch performed the services, the State Treasurer refused to pay a warrant issued by the Secretary of State in payment for the services performed. In an original mandamus proceeding in this court, we upheld the State Treasurer, saying:    So far as they concern litigation for the state, or in which the state is interested, the duties for which the claimant was appointed were germane to and might well be performed by either the attorney general or the district attorneys; and, the state having provided such officers charged with such duties, the corporation commissioner could not substitute an appointee of his own to perform those duties.    He cannot supersede the regular law officers of the state. The terms `clerks, stenographers, and assistants' [which the commissioner could appoint] are not comprehensive enough to include attorneys, or to work a repeal or amendment by implication of the laws providing legal advisers for the state and in its interest. 68 Or. at 594-96, 137 P. 864. SAIF Corporation is subject to the provisions of ORS chapter 180. We turn, then, to SAIF Corporation's second claim.