Brigham v. Payne

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Brigham v. Payne

609 P.2d 870, 45 Or. App. 847, 1980 Ore. App. LEXIS 2573

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 14, 1980

DocketNo. 78-4-153, CA 14221

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 609 P.2d 870 (Brigham v. Payne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brigham v. Payne, 609 P.2d 870, 45 Or. App. 847, 1980 Ore. App. LEXIS 2573 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

JOSEPH, J.

In this declaratory judgment action concerning the validity of a purported dedication of a small park in a subdivision, defendants, bona fide purchasers of the disputed parcel of real property, appeal from a summary judgment for plaintiffs, landowners in the subdivision. Defendants’ title derives from a tax foreclosure decree entered in 1966. The two-year statute of limitations for a collateral attack on that decree expired nearly 10 years prior to the filing of this lawsuit. ORS 312.230. The tax foreclosure decree is conclusive as to plaintiffs, who are private individuals. See Chizek v. Port of Newport, 252 Or 570, 578, 450 P2d 749 (1969). Judgment should be entered for defendants. Or Const, Art VII, § 3.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOSEPH, J.

In this declaratory judgment action concerning the validity of a purported dedication of a small park in a subdivision, defendants, bona fide purchasers of the disputed parcel of real property, appeal from a summary judgment for plaintiffs, landowners in the subdivision. Defendants’ title derives from a tax foreclosure decree entered in 1966. The two-year statute of limitations for a collateral attack on that decree expired nearly 10 years prior to the filing of this lawsuit. ORS 312.230. The tax foreclosure decree is conclusive as to plaintiffs, who are private individuals. See Chizek v. Port of Newport, 252 Or 570, 578, 450 P2d 749 (1969). Judgment should be entered for defendants. Or Const, Art VII, § 3.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

609 P.2d 870, 45 Or. App. 847, 1980 Ore. App. LEXIS 2573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brigham-v-payne-orctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack