Oregon — State Statute

Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 40 § 40.235 — Rule

Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 40 ·
Oregon Code § 40.235 · Enacted · Last updated March 01, 2026
Statute Text
Rule 504-1. Physician-patient privilege. (1) As used in this section, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) “Confidential communication” means a communication not intended to be disclosed to third persons except: (A) Persons present to further the interest of the patient in the consultation, examination or interview; (B) Persons reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication; or (C) Persons who are participating in the diagnosis and treatment under the direction of the physician, including members of the patient’s family. (b) “Patient” means a person who consults or is examined or interviewed by a physician. (c)(A) “Physician” means a person authorized and licensed or certified to practice medicine, podiatry or dentistry in any state or nation, or reasonably believed by the patient so to be, while engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of a physical condition. (B) “Physician” includes licensed or certified naturopathic and chiropractic physicians and dentists. (2) A patient has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications in a civil action, suit or proceeding, made for the purposes of diagnosis or treatment of the patient’s physical condition, among the patient, the patient’s physician or persons who are participating in the diagnosis or treatment under the direction of the physician, including members of the patient’s family. (3) The privilege created by this section may be claimed by: (a) The patient; (b) A guardian or conservator of the patient; (c) The personal representative of a deceased patient; or (d) The person who was the physician, but only on behalf of the patient. Such person’s authority so to do is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary. (4) The following is a nonexclusive list of limits on the privilege granted by this section: (a) If the judge orders an examination of the physical condition of the patient, communications made in the course thereof are not privileged under this section with respect to the particular purpose for which the examination is ordered unless the judge orders otherwise. (b) Except as provided in ORCP 44, there is no privilege under this section for communications made in the course of a physical examination performed under ORCP 44. (c) There is no privilege under this section with regard to any confidential communication or record of such confidential communication that would otherwise be privileged under this section when the use of the communication or record is specifically allowed under ORS 426.070, 426.074, 426.075, 426.095, 426.120 or 426.307. This paragraph only applies to the use of the communication or record to the extent and for the purposes set forth in the described statute sections. [1981 c.892 §33a; 1987 c.903 §2; 2005 c.353 §1; 2013 c.129 §3]
Plain English Explanation
This Oregon statute addresses Rule . AI-powered analysis coming soon.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
This section of Oregon law addresses Rule . Read the full statute text above for details.
This page reflects the current text as of our last update. Always verify with the official Oregon legislature website for the most current version.
The formal citation is Oregon Code § 40.235. Use this format in legal documents and court filings.
Browse related sections using the links below, or search all Oregon statutes on FlawFinder.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price $19 – $99 $133 – $646 $153 – $399
Contract None 1–3 year min 1–6 year min
Hidden fees $0, always Up to $469/search $25/mo + per-doc
Police SOPs 310+ departments No No
Plain-English ELI5 Included No No
Cancel One click Termination fees Account friction
Related Sections

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →