Dept. of Human Services v. E. J.

In order to overcome the privilege codified in ORS 419A.255, the party seeking to introduce evidence has the burden of showing that the contested records were not (1) history and prognosis information and (2) that they were not located in the supplemental confidential file or record of the case. Oregon Law Commission, Juvenile Records Work Group Report 14 (2013).

Appellant, mother to S, is a former ward of DHS and DHS sought dependency jurisdiction over Appellant’s child, S. DHS sought to disclose appellant’s juvenile file to a psychologist, who was tasked with evaluating appellant’s psychological state to determine the placement of S. Appellant appealed the trial court’s denial of her motion in limine to prohibit admission of her juvenile file. On appeal, DHS argued that because the juvenile report would only be provided to a psychologist, it is premature to title the report as evidence. In response, Appellant argued that the file constitutes evidence and it’s admission would be violative of ORS 419A.255(3)(b). In order to overcome the privilege codified in ORS 419A.255, DHS has the burden of showing that the appellant’s records were not (1) history and prognosis information and (2) that they were not located in the supplemental confidential file or record of the case. Oregon Law Commission, Juvenile Records Work Group Report 14 (2013). Here, DHS failed to satisfy that burden, as such the file was inadmissible. Reversed and remanded.