Legal Opinion

Uhl v. Krupsky

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 30, 2013No. 102190; A150512PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BREWER, J. pro tempore

The issue in this case is whether the requirements of ORS 105.620 — in particular, the requirement of ORS 105.620(l)(b) that a party claiming adverse possession of real property must have an “honest belief” that the claimant is the true owner — apply to a claim by an owner of fee simple title for the extinguishment of an easement. Because the trial court correctly concluded that ORS 105.620 does not apply to such claims, we affirm.

The pertinent facts are not in dispute. Plaintiffs are the owners of fee simple title to real property that they purchased in 1995. When they…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Faulconer v. WilliamsOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Hoffman v. Freeman Land and Timber, LLC.Oregon Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Kesterson v. California-Oregon Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1924

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Roy v. Woodstock Community Trust, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2014
  2. Mid-Valley Resources, Inc. v. Foxglove Properties, LLPCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. Roy, Hirschbuhl, Barr v. Woodstock Community Trust, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API