Curry v. Pope

The majority opinion has interpreted ORS 46.250 in a rigid and formalistic manner. It concedes that there is no good reason for making jurisdictional the requirement that an undertaking be filed within the time specified in the statute. It reasons, however, that the 1959 legislative action concerning ORS 19.033 (3) reflects a legislative intent with respect to ORS 46.250 to retain its timing requirement as jurisdictional.

This argument suggests that the majority believes the legislature made a substantive change in the procedure on appeal from the circuit court in 1959. In fact, it did not.…