Legal Opinion

Wilt v. Endicott

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 6, 1984No. 34692; CA A25107PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtButtler, P. J.

Plaintiffs brought this action to quiet title and for an accounting for the value of river gravel and materials alleged to have been removed from their property by defendants. Defendants raised affirmative defenses by which they claimed ownership of the disputed property by accretion and adverse possession. After a trial without a jury, the court entered judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

The parties are owners of parcels of property separated by the Willamette River. In 1859, when Oregon became a state, the disputed property was dry land except for the non-navigable…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. State Land Board v. Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Micelli v. AndrusOregon Supreme Court · 1912
  3. State Land Board v. SAUSEOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Gubser v. TownOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Richards v. Page Investment Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Burnham v. City of FarmingtonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
  2. State Ex Rel. Division of State Lands v. NorrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  3. Denison v. HodgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API