Young v. Hassler

725 P.2d 1299, 81 Or. App. 514
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedOctober 8, 1986
Docket83-1055-E; CA A37096
StatusPublished

This text of 725 P.2d 1299 (Young v. Hassler) 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
Young v. Hassler, 725 P.2d 1299, 81 Or. App. 514 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

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.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
725 P.2d 1299, 81 Or. App. 514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/young-v-hassler-orctapp-1986.