A. ABUSIVE LITIGANTS The presiding judge of any judicial district may, with due process, issue an order designating a party as an abusive litigant, restricting ongoing abusive filings, and requiring the posting of a security deposit, as provided in this rule
Rule 35.Abusive Litigants
Current through June 1, 2026 · Last verified July 11, 2026
In one sentenceRule 35, new for 2026, lets a presiding judge, after a hearing, designate a party an abusive litigant for bad-faith, harassing court filings, then require advance permission and a security deposit before that person can file new cases in the district.
Full Text of Rule 35
B. DEFINITIONS
(1) For purposes of this rule, "abusive litigant" means a person who is a party to a civil action or proceeding who in bad faith, through court filings, harasses, coerces, intimidates, discriminates against, or abuses another party to litigation.
(2) For purposes of this rule, "designation order" means a presiding judge order that is independent of any case within which it may have originated, and that continuesin effect after the conclusion of any case in which it may have originated.
(3) For purposes of this rule, "security" means an undertaking by an abusive litigant to ensure payment to an opposing party in an amount deemed sufficient to cover the opposing party's anticipated reasonable expenses of litigation, including attorney fees and costs.
(4) For purposes of this rule, "presiding judge" means either the presiding judge appointed by the Supreme Court Chief Justice, the judicial officer designated to fulfill presiding judge duties in the absence of the appointed presiding judge, or the judicial officer designated by the appointed presiding judge to oversee proceedings brought under this rule.
C. FACTORS THE COURT MAY CONSIDER To determine whether a party is an abusive litigant as set forth in subsection B(1) of this rule, in addition to any other indicia of bad faith, the court may consider:
(1) if the litigant is represented by counsel;
(2) if the litigant has a good faith expectation of prevailing;
(3) if the litigant is attempting to relitigate a resolved claim against the same party that prevailed, without first having diligently pursued appeal;
(4) if the litigant has a good faith motive in pursuing the litigation;
(5) if the litigant has caused unnecessary expense to opposing parties or placed a needless burden on the courts;
(6) if the litigant is filing frivolous motions, pleadings, or other documents without any apparent basis in fact or law;
(7) if the litigant has been restrained from contact with the opposing party by a court order that is active at the time of the new court filings;
(8) if the litigant has a history of abusive litigation;
(9) if the litigant has previously been declared a vexatious or abusive litigant in another jurisdiction; or
(10) if there are any other considerations that shed light on the circumstances of the litigation
D. DESIGNATION AND SECURITY HEARING
(1) In any case pending in any court of this state, including a case filed in the small claims department, the presiding judge may, on the court's own motion, set a hearing to determine whether a litigant has engaged in abusive litigation. At the hearing on the motion, the court may request and consider any evidence, written or oral, by witness or affidavit or declaration, or through judicial notice, that may be relevant to the motion.
(2) If, after considering all of the evidence, the court designates a party as an abusive litigant, the court must state its reasons on the record or in its written order. The court's order must be narrowly tailored to protect only the parties, persons, or category of people targeted by the abusive litigation, and to restrict only the disallowed topic or issues.
(3) The court may require the abusive litigant to post security in an amount and within such time as the court deems appropriate in order for the litigation to continue. If the abusive litigant fails to post security in the time required by the court, the court must promptly issue a judgment by default with prejudice against the abusive litigant.
(4) A determination made by the court in such a hearing is not admissible on the merits of the action or claim, nor deemed to be a decision on any issue in the action or claim.
(5) A designation order will include a pre-filing requirement prohibiting an abusive litigant from commencing any new action or claim in the courts of that judicial district that falls within the scope of the designation made under subsection D(2) of this rule without first obtaining leave of the presiding judge.
(6) On entry, a copy of the designation order must be sent by the court to: the person designated to be an abusive litigant at the last known address listed in court records, that person's attorney of record, if any, and the opposing parties, if any. Disobedience of such an order may be punished as a contempt of court, in addition to any other remedy in this rule.
(7) A designation order does not prohibit an abusive litigant from filing responsive pleadings to any new action or claim commenced against them by another person.
(8) A designation order is a presiding judge order, whether or not it is entered in the context of an active case proceeding. As a presiding judge order, a designation order is not subject to Rule 71 A, 71 B, or 71 D.
E. REQUESTING EXCEPTION TO DESIGNATION ORDER
(1) Procedure. An abusive litigant or their attorney representative may request to initiate new litigation that would otherwise violate the court's designation order only by petition to the presiding judge, which may be made ex parte if no action is pending. The petition must be accompanied by an affidavit or a declaration and must include a copy of the document that the litigant proposes to file as an exhibit. The petition will only be granted on a showing that:
(a) the filing is made in good faith and not for the purpose of harassment, coercion, intimidation, discrimination, or abuse of another; or
(b) a statute of limitations or ultimate repose deadline is so close at hand that denial of the request to commence the new action could foreclose the litigant's right to bring a potentially valid claim.
(2) Deposit of security. The presiding judge may condition the filing of the proposed action or claim on a deposit of security as provided in this rule.
(3) Relation back. If the presiding judge issues an order allowing the filing of the action, then the filing date of the complaint or other case-initiating document relates back to the date of filing of the petition requesting leave to file. On request to the presiding judge, in any proposed action with an imminent risk of obsolescence under a statute of limitations, the filing party may be permitted to serve a complete copy of the petition, affidavit, or declaration, and proposed pleading, on any party for whom expedited service is necessary to perfect jurisdiction under ORS 12.020
F. SETTING A HEARING STAYS PLEADING OR RESPONSE DEADLINE A court decision to set a hearing to designate a party as an abusive litigant stays pleading or response deadlines. After the presiding judge makes a determination on the merits of the motion, deadlines are set at the longest of the following, unless the court directs otherwise: their original date, within 10 days of service of the order, or within 10 days of the deposit of security.
G. CASES FILED WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE PRESIDING JUDGE If an abusive litigant initiates new litigation that falls within the parameters of the designation order entered under subsection D(2) of this rule without first obtaining leave of the presiding judge, then any party to the action or claim, or the court on its own motion, may file a notice stating that the abusive litigant issubject to a designation order. The notice must be served on the litigant and all parties at the most current address entered in court records. The filing of such a notice stays the litigation against all opposing parties. The presiding judge must dismiss the action or claim unlessthe abusive litigant files a motion for leave to proceed within 10 days of service of the notice. If the presiding judge issues an order allowing the action to proceed, then the abusive litigant must serve a copy of that order on all other parties. Each party must plead or otherwise respond to the action or claim within the time remaining for response to the original pleading or within 10 days after service of that order, whichever period is longer, unless the court otherwise directs
H. APPLICATION TO VACATE DESIGNATION ORDER AND SET ASIDE DESIGNATION.
(1) Procedure. An abusive litigant may file an application to vacate the designation order and set aside the "abusive litigant" designation. The application must be filed in the court that entered the designation order, either in the action in which the designation order was entered, or contemporaneously with a request to the presiding judge to file new litigation under section E of this rule. The application must be accompanied by evidence in the form of declarations or exhibits that support the premise that there has been a material change in the facts on which the order was granted and that justice would be served by vacating the order.
(2) A court may vacate a designation order and set aside the abusive litigant designation on a showing of material change in the facts on which the order was granted and that justice would be served by vacating the order. An evidentiary hearing on an application under this section may be set at the court's discretion.
(3) An abusive litigant whose application to vacate a designation order and set aside the designation is denied will not be permitted to file another similar application for one year after the date of denial of the previous application. An application to vacate under this subsection does not require an exception to a designation order under subsection E(1) of this rule.
Amendment History
[amended 12/14/2024]
Plain-English Summary
Rule 35 is Oregon’s newest civil procedure rule, adopted by the Council on Court Procedures effective January 1, 2026. It gives courts a tool against litigants who use the court system to wear down or harass someone rather than to press a genuine claim. After a hearing that satisfies due process, the presiding judge of a judicial district — its administrative head judge, or a judge specifically designated for this role — can designate a party an “abusive litigant”: someone who, in bad faith and through court filings, harasses, coerces, intimidates, discriminates against, or abuses another party to litigation. The rule lists ten factors the court may weigh in deciding, among them whether the litigant is represented by counsel, whether the litigant has a good-faith basis for the case, whether the litigant is trying to relitigate a claim already lost without pursuing an appeal, whether the litigant has burdened the courts or the other side with unnecessary expense, and whether the litigant has a history of abusive litigation or was previously declared vexatious or abusive elsewhere. The presiding judge may set this hearing on the court’s own motion in any pending case, including one filed in the small claims department.
A designation order outlives the case that produced it and applies across the judicial district, but it must be narrowly tailored to the specific person, people, or topic the abuse targeted. Its central restriction is a pre-filing requirement: the litigant cannot start a new case that falls within the order’s scope without first getting the presiding judge’s permission. The court can also require the litigant to post security to cover the opposing party’s anticipated litigation costs, and if the litigant misses the deadline to post it, the court must promptly enter a default judgment with prejudice against the litigant. Two limits cut the other way: the hearing decides nothing about the merits of the underlying case, and the order never blocks the litigant from filing an answer or other response to a case someone else brings against them — it restricts only the litigant’s own new filings.
A litigant who wants to file something new despite the order can petition the presiding judge — even without an existing case, and even ex parte — attaching a copy of the proposed filing, and must show either that the filing is made in good faith or that a filing deadline is close enough to expire that denial could cost the litigant a valid claim. If the presiding judge grants leave, the new filing’s date relates back to when the petition was filed. A litigant who files without asking first risks having any party, or the court on its own, flag the violation; that pauses the new case and leads to dismissal unless the litigant requests leave within 10 days. To undo a designation altogether, the litigant applies to vacate it by showing a material change in the facts and that vacating the order would serve justice — and gets only one attempt per year if that application is denied. Because a designation order is a presiding-judge order rather than an ordinary judgment, it falls outside the standard Rule 71(A), (B), and (D) routes for undoing a judgment or order; this vacate procedure is the rule’s own substitute.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an abusive litigant under Oregon Rule 35?
A party to a civil action or proceeding who, in bad faith and through court filings, harasses, coerces, intimidates, discriminates against, or abuses another party to the litigation. A presiding judge can apply that designation only after a hearing that satisfies due process.
Is Rule 35 a new rule?
Yes. The Council on Court Procedures adopted it effective January 1, 2026, making it the newest rule in the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure.
Does Oregon call this a “vexatious litigant” rule?
No — Oregon’s own term is “abusive litigant.” The concept is similar to what other states call a vexatious-litigant statute, and a litigant’s prior designation as vexatious or abusive in another jurisdiction is itself one factor an Oregon court may weigh under Rule 35(C).
Can someone designated an abusive litigant still defend a lawsuit filed against them?
Yes. The restriction only limits the litigant’s own new filings. A designation order never stops the litigant from filing an answer or other response to a case someone else brings against them.
What happens if a designated litigant doesn’t post the security a court requires?
The court must promptly enter a default judgment with prejudice against the litigant.
How can someone get an abusive litigant designation lifted?
By filing an application to vacate the designation order, showing a material change in the facts on which the order was based and that vacating it would serve justice. If the application is denied, the litigant cannot file another one for a year.
Source & verification. The rule text is reproduced verbatim from the
official Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure (ORCP 35). Prescribed by the Council on Court Procedures (ORS 1.735), subject to amendment, repeal, or supplementation by the Oregon Legislative Assembly. The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 11, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: oregon abusive litigant rule 2026vexatious litigant designation oregon courtsorcp 35 abusive litigantrestricting a frivolous filer from suing again oregonpresiding judge security deposit abusive litiganthow to vacate an abusive litigant designation oregon