Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From or-court-docs
Scaffolds an Oregon court declaration with numbered paragraphs, verification clause, signature block, and optional exhibit cover pages.
npx claudepluginhub codearranger/claude-legal --plugin or-court-docsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/or-court-docs:or-draft-declarationThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Scaffold a new declaration that complies with UTCR 2.010 and
Guides technical evaluation of code review feedback: read fully, restate for understanding, verify against codebase, respond with reasoning or pushback before implementing.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Scaffold a new declaration that complies with UTCR 2.010 and ORCP 1 E. The declaration should be ready to fill in, sign, and file in support of a motion or other filing.
NOT LEGAL ADVICE. This skill scaffolds a court document as a drafting aid. The user — not the skill — is the declarant, chooses what facts to swear to, and signs the declaration. Verify every rule, deadline, and citation against current law before filing. Pair with substantive review by counsel where stakes warrant.
A declaration with:
I, John Doe, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws
of the State of Oregon that the following is true and
correct:
This is the ORCP 1 E form. Some practitioners prefer the shorter:
I, John Doe, hereby declare under penalty of perjury the
following:
Either is acceptable. The ORCP 1 E form is cleaner.
Each paragraph contains one factual point. Number with bold Arabic numerals followed by a period and tab:
1. Identity. I am the Defendant in the above-captioned
action. I am 42 years old, an Oregon resident, and I make
this Declaration in support of Defendant's Motion to
Compel under ORCP 46 A.
2. Personal knowledge. The facts stated in this Declaration
are based on my personal knowledge, except where I
explicitly state otherwise.
3. Service of First Requests for Production. On April 1,
2025, I served First Requests for Production Nos. 1–6 on
Plaintiff's counsel via File and Serve. A true and
correct copy of the Requests is attached as Exhibit 1.
4. Plaintiff's Responses. On May 1, 2025, I received
Plaintiff's Responses via File and Serve. Plaintiff
objected on grounds of "relevance, burden, and
possession" and did not produce documents responsive to
Requests Nos. 3, 5, and 6. A true and correct copy of
Plaintiff's Responses is attached as Exhibit 2.
5. Meet-and-confer letter. On May 10, 2025, I sent
Plaintiff's counsel a meet-and-confer letter identifying
the objections and requesting supplementation. A true
and correct copy is attached as Exhibit 3.
6. Phone conference. On May 14, 2025, I spoke with
Plaintiff's counsel by phone for approximately 30
minutes. I memorialized the call by email the same day;
a true and correct copy of that email is attached as
Exhibit 4.
7. Plaintiff's position. As of the date of this Declaration,
Plaintiff has not supplemented as to Requests Nos. 3, 5,
and 6. Plaintiff maintains its objections.
8. Damages from non-production. Without these documents, I
cannot evaluate whether Plaintiff has standing to bring
this action.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
State of Oregon that the foregoing is true and correct.
DATED this ____ day of ___________, 20__.
Executed at Portland, Oregon.
If executed outside Oregon, change to:
Executed at [City, State].
(28 USC § 1746 form requires identifying the state.)
______________________________________
JOHN DOE
Defendant, pro se
[Address]
[Phone]
[Email]
ORCP 1 E: A "declaration under penalty of perjury" in the prescribed form may be used in lieu of a notarized affidavit. The acceptable form:
"I hereby declare that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I understand it is made for use as evidence in court and is subject to penalty for perjury."
OR the shorter:
"I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Oregon that the foregoing is true and correct."
Either form is accepted statewide. Most pro se filers use the shorter form.
Under OEC 602, the declarant must have personal knowledge of every stated fact, OR must specify the basis for belief.
If the declarant is testifying about facts they did not personally observe, say so:
9. Reliance on records. The amounts and dates in
paragraphs 3–6 are derived from my review of [source —
bank statements, invoices, etc.]. I personally
reviewed these records on [date]; true and correct
copies are attached as Exhibits 5 and 6.
A declaration that includes facts beyond the declarant's personal knowledge, without specifying the basis, is subject to objection under OEC 602 and may be struck on motion under ORCP 47 D (for SJ practice) or its analog.
For declarations with exhibits, follow these conventions:
See or-statewide-format/references/exhibit-handling.md for
the full exhibit-handling guide.
Declarations contain sworn facts. Motions contain argument.
A common mistake: putting argument in the declaration.
❌ Wrong (in the declaration):
Plaintiff is clearly a debt buyer that doesn't have proper chain of title and is trying to mislead the Court.
This is argument. It belongs in the motion, not the declaration.
✅ Right (in the declaration):
- Plaintiff's status. Based on my review of the public filings of [Plaintiff entity name] with the Oregon Secretary of State (Exhibit 5), Plaintiff is a debt-buying entity that purchases charged-off accounts. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges it "acquired" my account through an "assignment" but has not produced any document evidencing that assignment in response to Requests for Production.
The facts are sworn; the characterization ("clearly trying to mislead") is omitted. The motion can argue the characterization based on these facts.
For declarations supporting business records under OEC 803(6) (the analog to FRE 803(6)), the declarant should be a "custodian or other qualified witness" attesting to:
This is the foundation pattern for OEC 902(11) certified business records.
For a debt-buyer plaintiff's declaration attempting to
authenticate the original creditor's records, the declaration
typically fails because the declarant is the debt buyer's
custodian, not the original creditor's. See or-consumer-debt/ references/evidence-debt-buyer.md for the foundational
challenges.
This skill ALWAYS composes with:
or-statewide-format — caption, format, signature block,
exhibitsIt typically composes with:
or-pro-se — for pro se declarantsor-draft-motion — the declaration usually accompanies
a motionor-multcc / or-wccc / or-county-courts — the
court header reflects the venueBefore filing:
or-quality-check — format passor-fact-check — verifies that the declaration's facts
are consistent with the motion and any exhibits| Pitfall | Consequence |
|---|---|
| Missing the perjury clause | Declaration is invalid; may need to re-execute |
| Argument mixed in with facts | Subject to objection; weakens both motion and decl |
| Facts beyond personal knowledge without basis | OEC 602 objection |
| Wrong jurisdiction in salutation ("California" / "Washington") | Invalid form |
| Lettered exhibits (A, B, C) | Wrong convention for Oregon |
| Static date in the body | Use fill-in blanks for handwritten date |
| No exhibit list | Disorganized record; judge can't navigate |
or-statewide-format/references/templates/declaration.md —
full templateor-statewide-format/references/exhibit-handling.md —
exhibit conventionsor-pro-se/references/pro-se-drafting-framework.md — drafting
principlesor-draft-motion — companion motionor-law-references/references/evidence-rules.md — OEC
references