Patterson v. Chambers Power Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Lane: James W. Hamilton, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice McBride. This is a suit brought by Ida Patterson and 19 other residents of the City of Eugene against the Chambers Power Company and Frank L. Chambers, to enjoin them from widening the mill-race in the City of' Eugene and thereby cutting away and destroying the plaintiff’s property. The property involved constitutes an attractive residential portion of Eugene, and is of considerable value.
Read the full summary
From Lane: James W. Hamilton, Judge. Department 1. Statement by Mr. Justice McBride. This is a suit brought by Ida Patterson and 19 other residents of the City of Eugene against the Chambers Power Company and Frank L. Chambers, to enjoin them from widening the mill-race in the City of' Eugene and thereby cutting away and destroying the plaintiff’s property. The property involved constitutes an attractive residential portion of Eugene, and is of considerable value. It is situated along the banks of the mill-race, which is owned by the defendants and used to conduct water from the Willamette…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice McBride
1-6. The whole case here turns upon the construction of the deed from Shaw. It is plain and direct in its terms, and was executed and recorded before any of the plaintiffs purchased their property, and they therefore took title with constructive notice of any burden which it created upon their holdings. "We are aware of no rule of law, and there is none, prohibiting the grant of an easement to take effect or to be enjoyed in the future, and that is this case. We have first a grant of the water-power upon the premises conveyed which necessarily made the raceway which carried the water across…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Herman v. . RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Sweetland v. OlsenMontana Supreme Court · 1891
- Arthur Irrigation Co. v. StrayerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1911
- Ruhnke v. AubertOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Strong v. BenedictSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1824
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District v. DickieWashington Supreme Court · 2003
- City of Pasadena v. California-Michigan Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Coulsen v. Aberdeen-Springfield Canal Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1929
- POWERS ET UX. v. Coos Bay Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1953
- Minto v. Salem Water, Light & Power Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1926
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.