Wright v. PERB

Although ORS 238.450(4) states “that a member is entitled to judicial review under ORS 183.484 of a written decision made by PERS on a disputed benefits computation under ORS 238.450, that provision can confer jurisdiction on a circuit court only if the decision constitutes a ‘final order’ as that term is defined in ORS 183.310(6)(b). See ORS 183.480(3).

Plaintiff appealed from the Public Employees Retirement Board’s (PERB) dismissal of his request for a contested case hearing. Plaintiff assigned error to PERB’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction over the issues Plaintiff had raised in his request. On appeal, Plaintiff argued that PERB did have jurisdiction to conclude whether their letter to him was a “written decision” or a “final order.” Additionally, Plaintiff argued that the letter from PERB did not qualify as either a “written decision” or a “final order” and therefore, PERB had jurisdiction for administrative review. In response, PERB argued it correctly dismissed Plaintiff’s request because it was untimely, and his issue was subject to judicial review only, not administrative review by PERB. Although ORS 238.450(4) states “that a member is entitled to judicial review under ORS 183.484 of a written decision made by PERS on a disputed benefits computation under ORS 238.450, that provision can confer jurisdiction on a circuit court only if the decision constitutes a ‘final order’ as that term is defined in ORS 183.310(6)(b). See ORS 183.480(3). The Oregon Court of Appeals held that PERB needed to reconsider its order of dismissal because it did not have any legitimate reason to conclude that it lacked jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s request. Reversed and remanded.