Legal Opinion

Stone v. Henry Enterprises, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 22, 1989No. E86-1724; CA A48061PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment granting plaintiff an easement by prescription over a road crossing defendant’s ranch. It contends that plaintiff did not prove that plaintiffs predecessor’s use of the road was “adverse.” We review de novo and reverse.

In order to establish a private prescriptive easement, a plaintiff must show, by clear and convincing evidence, an open and notorious use of land adverse to the rights of the servient owner for a continuous period of 10 years. Thompson v. Scott, 270 Or 542, 546-47, 528 P2d 509 (1974). Proof by “clear and convincing evidence” means that the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Riley Hill General Contractor, Inc. v. Tandy Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Thompson v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Feldman Et Ux. v. Knapp Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Woods v. HartOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Kondor v. ProseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. House v. HagerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  2. Hayward v. EllsworthCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API