Opinion · Court of Appeals of Oregon
Young v. Hassler
Young v. Hassler, 81 Or. App. 514 (Or. Ct. App. 1986)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals of Oregon
- Jurisdiction
- Oregon
- Date
- 1986-10-08
- Topic
- general
PER CURIAM Plaintiffs claim a prescriptive right to use an easement along the west side of defendants’ property. On de novo review, we affirm generally the trial court’s judgment for plaintiffs. The parties agree that the language in the judgment saying that the “easement shall proceed from the Southerly boundary of Rogue River Loop Highway to the Southwesterly corner of Plaintiffs’ premises” (emphasis supplied) is erroneous and that “Southwesterly” should read “Southeasterly.” The judgment is hereby amended accordingly. Judgment modified as described in the preceding paragraph and affirmed as modified.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Young v. Hassler. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
Plaintiffs claim a prescriptive right to use an easement along the west side of defendants’ property. On de novo review, we affirm generally the trial court’s judgment for plaintiffs. The parties agree that the language in the judgment saying that the “easement shall proceed from the Southerly boundary of Rogue River Loop Highway to the Southwesterly corner of Plaintiffs’ premises” (emphasis supplied) is erroneous and that “Southwesterly” should read “Southeasterly.” The judgment is hereby amended accordingly.
Judgment modified as described in the preceding paragraph and affirmed as modified.