Lufkin v. Dept. of Human Services

“The general rule in Oregon is that, although waivers of constitutional and statutory rights may be expressed through  contract  terms,  those  terms  must  clearly  indicate an intention to renounce a known privilege or power.” Assn. of Oregon Corrections Emp. v. State of Oregon, 353 Or 170, 295 P3d 38 (2013).

Petitioners began the process of adopting “J” in March of 2017. Prior to finalization of the adoption, Petitioners signed an agreement with the Department of Human Services (“DHS”) that set forth the total amount of monthly adoption assistance payable to Petitioners. Petitioners did not receive notice of their right to a hearing to contest the assistance determination before they signed the agreement and the agreement did not contain an express waiver of that right. Petitioners were subsequently denied a hearing to contest the assistance determination on the basis that they had waived their appellate right. Petitioners appealed on the contention that their appellate right was improperly denied. On appeal, DHS argued that the agreement and surrounding context evidenced a waiver of Petitioners’ appellate right. “The general rule in Oregon is that, although waivers of constitutional and statutory rights may be expressed through  contract  terms,  those  terms  must  clearly  indicate an intention to renounce a known privilege or power.” Assn. of Oregon Corrections Emp. v. State of Oregon, 353 Or 170, 295 P3d 38 (2013). The Court held that nothing in the agreement or surrounding context evidenced an intent on Petitioners’ behalf to waive their appellate right. Reversed and remanded.