Duyn v. Motor Vehicles Division
This text of 622 P.2d 757 (Duyn v. Motor Vehicles Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Motor Vehicles Division sought to suspend petitioner’s operator’s license because of his refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test following his arrest for driving under the influence of intoxicants. After a hearing before the Division, petitioner appealed the suspension order to circuit court under ORS 482.560. The circuit court granted petitioner relief, and the Division appeals.
A petition for circuit court de novo review of a suspension order in a breathalyzer refusal case must allege the factual basis of the petitioner’s claim that the suspension order was erroneous. The scope of the administrative hearing and of de novo review in circuit court is limited to the five grounds enumerated in ORS 482.5501 and to a sixth judicially recognized ground (concerning the regularity of an officer’s sworn report). Blackburn v. MVD, 33 Or App 397, 576 P2d 1267 (1978).
[187]*187Petitioner’s amended petition alleged no facts constituting a recognized ground for relief. It did not state a factual basis for setting aside the suspension order. It was error for the circuit court to enter a judgment on these pleadings for petitioner. Ames v. Motor Vehicles Division, 16 Or App 288, 517 P2d 1216 (1974).
Reversed and remanded for trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
622 P.2d 757, 50 Or. App. 185, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 2275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duyn-v-motor-vehicles-division-orctapp-1981.