Oregon Statutes 25.220 – Computer records of administrator; evidence of authenticity not required in support proceedings; evidentiary effect
(1) In any proceeding to establish, enforce or modify a support obligation, extrinsic evidence of authenticity is not required as a condition precedent to the admission of a computer record of the administrator that may reflect the employment records of a parent, the support payment record of an obligor, the payment of public assistance, the amounts paid, the period during which public assistance was paid, the persons receiving or having received assistance and any other pertinent information, if the record bears a seal purporting to be that of the administrator and is certified as a true copy by original, electronic or facsimile signature of a person purporting to be an officer or employee of the administrator. Records certified in accordance with this section constitute prima facie evidence of the existence of the facts stated therein.
Terms Used In Oregon Statutes 25.220
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- Obligation: An order placed, contract awarded, service received, or similar transaction during a given period that will require payments during the same or a future period.
- Person: includes individuals, corporations, associations, firms, partnerships, limited liability companies and joint stock companies. See Oregon Statutes 174.100
- Precedent: A court decision in an earlier case with facts and law similar to a dispute currently before a court. Precedent will ordinarily govern the decision of a later similar case, unless a party can show that it was wrongly decided or that it differed in some significant way.
(2) To the extent permitted under federal and state law, obligors and obligees, and their attorneys, may obtain copies of such records upon request made to the administrator. [Formerly 23.855; 1989 c.519 § 1; 1997 c.704 § 23; 1999 c.735 § 19; 2019 c.291 § 6]