Jacobsen v. Perley

792 P.2d 116, 102 Or. App. 121, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 555
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided June 6, 1990·No. 87-11-146; CA A49974·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff brought an action to quiet title to a strip of land adjoining defendant’s lot. On de novo review, Rogelis v. Pettis, 49 Or App 537, 539, 619 P2d 1339 (1980), rev den 290 Or 449 (1981), we find clear and convincing evidence that plaintiff established all the elements of adverse possession. Her use of the disputed land was actual, open and notorious, exclusive, adverse, continuous for at least ten years and under claim of right. Lee v. Hansen, 282 Or 371, 375, 578 P2d 784 (1978). On the basis of the evidence, the court’s designation of the disputed strip is correct.

Affirmed.

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

Jacobsen v. Perley, 792 P.2d 116, 102 Or. App. 121, 1990 Ore. App. LEXIS 555 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).

792 P.2d 116 (Jacobsen v. Perley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lee v. Hansen
578 P.2d 784 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1978)
Rogelis v. Pettis
619 P.2d 1339 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1980)