Kragt v. Board of Parole

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Attorney Fees
  • Date Filed: 07-12-2023
  • Case #: No. A163421
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: AOYAGI, J. for the Court; JOYCE, J.; JACQUOT, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

While the Court may choose to decline to award costs outlined in ORS 20.310(1) when the case is dismissed for mootness or otherwise, a dismissal based on the merits will typically result in the Court awarding fees to the prevailing party. DeYoung/Thomas v. Board of Parole, 332 Or 266, 276, 27 P3d 110 (2001).

Petitioner sought reconsideration of a previous decision that awarded attorneys fees to the Board of Parole as the prevailing party of his appeal. Alternatively, Petitioner asked the court to make a record of their reasons for the awarding of costs. 

Citing ORS 20.310(1), the Court found that they typically shall allow costs to the prevailing party. The decision not to award costs is “based on the individual circumstances of that case” and the Court is “not required to explain allowing costs in the ordinary course.” 

The Court found that precedent allows that “appellate courts may decline to award costs to the prevailing party in cases of dismissal” for mootness or otherwise. DeYoung/Thomas v. Board of Parole, 332 Or 266, 276, 27 P3d 110 (2001). However, the immediate appeal was decided largely on the merits and the Court was well within its statutory power and adhered to precedent in awarding costs to the Board of Parole. 


Advanced Search

Back to Top