Stone v. Henry Enterprises, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
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
- Riley Hill General Contractor, Inc. v. Tandy Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1987
- Thompson v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1974
- Feldman Et Ux. v. Knapp Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
- Woods v. HartOregon Supreme Court · 1969
- Kondor v. ProseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- House v. HagerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- Hayward v. EllsworthCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996