Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Hicks

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 13, 1981No. 79-538 E, CA 17962PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.

This is a suit in equity for a mandatory injunction. Plaintiff seeks to require defendants to restore an irrigation line to its original position on her property and to refrain from further interference with it. She also seeks $10,000 general damages. Defendants Hicks counterclaim, seeking compensation from plaintiff for her use of the system. The trial court found plaintiff had not proven her right to use of the irrigation system and dismissed all claims. Our review is de novo. We reverse and remand.

The record is replete with indications that this suit arises at least partially from personal…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Blake-McFall Co. v. WilsonOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  2. First State & Savings Bank v. OliverOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Roseburg Nat. Bank v. CampOregon Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Mattechek v. PughOregon Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Johnson v. Pacific Land Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Rayl v. Shull Enterprises, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Schwend v. SchwendMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Bohle v. ThompsonCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  4. Wyoming State Farm Loan Board v. Farm Credit System Capital Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Western Ag Land Partners v. Department of RevenueCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1986

7 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