Courts generally presume that a lawsuit has been filed in good faith, and a party moving for sanctions against the party who filed a lawsuit or claim must overcome this presumption to prove abuse of the judicial process. Thus, courts distinguish between (1) claims that are ultimately found to be merely groundless (and thus not sanctionable) and (2) claims that are ultimately found to be both groundless and brought in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment (and thus sanctionable). The sanctions rules generally do not require a party or its attorney to be right; they require the party or its attorney to make a reasonable inquiry into the facts and the laws related to the claims.

Contempt of court is broadly defined as disobedience to or disrespect of a court by acting in opposition to its authority. Contempt of court may be punished by the court with civil and criminal sanctions or penalties.

In Oregon, as in many jurisdictions, there is a legal presumption that lawsuits are filed in good faith. To impose sanctions for abuse of the judicial process, the moving party must demonstrate that the opposing party's lawsuit was both groundless and filed with improper motives, such as bad faith or harassment. This is in line with Oregon's rules on sanctions, which are designed to ensure that parties and their attorneys conduct a reasonable investigation into the facts and applicable law before filing claims. The rules do not penalize parties for being incorrect in their legal positions, as long as their actions were based on a reasonable inquiry. Regarding contempt of court, Oregon recognizes this as an act of disobedience or disrespect towards the court's authority, which can result in either civil or criminal penalties. The specific rules and procedures for sanctions and contempt are detailed in the Oregon Revised Statutes and the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure.