Legal Opinion

McGrath v. Bradley

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 27, 2010No. 05CV0698; A139983PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRosenblum, J.

Plaintiffs brought this action for quiet title, claiming that they had established a prescriptive easement for a driveway across defendants’ property. Defendants responded that plaintiffs and their predecessors used the driveway in question by permission and, thus, that their use could not have ripened into a prescriptive easement. Defendants also asserted that, even if plaintiffs and their predecessors had established a prescriptive easement, it had been extinguished by defendants’ and their predecessors’ adverse use of the easement. The trial court ruled in favor of plaintiff McGrath,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Feldman Et Ux. v. Knapp Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Woods v. HartOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Coventon v. SeufertOregon Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Trewin v. HunterOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Hoffman v. DorrisOregon Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hisey v. PatrickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  2. 7455 Inc. v. Tuala Northwest, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  3. Wels v. HippeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  4. Sander v. McKinleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. McGrath v. BradleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

1 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