Legal Opinion

David v. Brokaw

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1927PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, J.

The question presented for solution is, “have the plaintiffs an irrevocable license or easement in the water of the spring belonging to the defendants!” There is no controversy about an oral agreement having been entered into between the parties. There is some dispute between them as to the terms of the oral agreement. If the agreement amounted to a mere license, it is revocable by the licensor at his pleasure. However, if relying upon the license plaintiffs have made material and permanent improvements the license has become irrevocable, if its revocation would constitute a fraud upon…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Stoner v. ZuckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Pifer v. BrownWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Clark v. GliddenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1887
  4. Risien v. BrownTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Heisley v. EastmanOregon Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Schafer v. Fraser Et UxOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  2. LUCKEY ET UX v. DeatsmanOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  3. ANDERSON ET UX. v. MoothartOregon Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Beisell Et Ux. v. Wood Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Royer v. GaileyOregon Supreme Court · 1969

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

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

Powered by the Exa API