King v. Clements
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, J.
Defendants appeal, assigning error to the trial court’s denial of attorney fees, following the parties’ settlement of an easement dispute. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
The procedural posture is convoluted. In November 1992, plaintiffs filed an action alleging alternative claims for declaration of a prescriptive easement or imposition of a way of necessity pursuant to ORS 376.150 et seq. Defendants were among the persons over whose property the alleged easement or way of necessity would run. Defendants Arthur and Helen Clements and Michael and Katherine Kinney filed answers,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Baugh v. Bryant Limited PartnershipsOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Morgan v. HartCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
3Cited by6 opinions
- Interstate Roofing, Inc. v. Springville Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- Cramblit v. Diamond B ConstructorsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- Galfano v. KTVL-TVCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
- Reed v. Jackson County Citizens LeagueCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- State Ex Rel. Lowell v. EadsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.