Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Oregon » Court of Appeals » 2009 » A136347 Wolf v. Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc.
A136347 Wolf v. Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc.
State: Oregon
Court: Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Clerk
Docket No: A136347
Case Date: 08/12/2009
Plaintiff: A136347 Wolf
Defendant: Central Oregon & Pacific Railroad, Inc.
Specialty: TERRY WOLF and FLORENCE WOLF,
Preview:FILED: August 12, 2009
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
TERRY WOLF and FLORENCE WOLF,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
CENTRAL OREGON & PACIFIC RAILROAD, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant-Respondent.
Douglas County Circuit Court
05CV4330CC
A136347

Randolph Lee Garrison, Judge.
Argued and submitted on February 24, 2009.
Charles F. Lee argued the cause for appellants.  With him on the briefs was Lee & Kaser, P.C.
Daniel Webb Howard argued the cause for respondent.  With him on the brief was Gleaves Swearingen LLP.
Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Sercombe, Judge.
EDMONDS, P. J.
Affirmed.
EDMONDS, P. J.
Plaintiffs appeal following the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant. Plaintiffs, who are owners of real property in Douglas County, Oregon (the Wolf property), brought this action against defendant, claiming a prescriptive easement that would allow them to continue to use the private crossing over defendant's railroad tracks that intersect their land.  They also sought damages they alleged had resulted from defendant's removal of the paved surface of the existing private crossing.  The trial court granted summary judgment in defendant's favor based on its conclusions that plaintiffs could not obtain a prescriptive easement over a government granted railroad right-of-way and that the railroad, in this case, obtained its right-of-way before plaintiffs' predecessor-in-interest filed his claim to the land at issue.  On appeal, plaintiffs assert that the trial court erred in determining that (1) a prescriptive easement could not lie over property granted by the federal government as railroad right-of-way; and (2) the land in question had been granted to the railroad by the federal government.  We affirm.
The relevant facts on summary judgment are not in dispute.  The Wolf property is bisected by defendant's railroad tracks that were originally authorized by the United States Congress pursuant to a land grant enacted on July 25, 1866 (the 1866 land grant).(1)  The 1866 land grant provided for a right-of-way 200 feet wide over the public lands.(2)  In 1880, before the land was surveyed, plaintiffs' predecessor-in
Download A136347.pdf

Oregon Law

Oregon State Laws
Oregon Tax
Oregon Court
    > Muller v. Oregon
Oregon Labor Laws
Oregon Agencies
    > DMV Oregon

Comments

Tips