Chapter 376
376.105
See
annotations under ORS 376.175 and 376.180.
376.150 to 376.200
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Way
of necessity may not be established if petitioner could acquire easement for
access to public road through other legal action. Chambers v. Disney, 65 Or App
684, 672 P2d 711 (1983)
Way
of necessity created under these sections must be open to public and, so
construed, sections do not violate article I, section 18 of Oregon
Constitution. Chapman v. Perron, 69 Or App 445, 685
P2d 492 (1984)
Where
petitioner’s land does not abut highway, ORS 376.180 requires petitioners to
show they lack easement so as to show need for way of necessity. Witten v.
Murphy, 71 Or App 511, 692 P2d 715 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
Under
these sections, if petitioners have existing enforceable access to public road,
they are not entitled to way of necessity, notwithstanding whether such access
is reasonable. Pike v. Wyllie, 100 Or App 120, 785 P2d 764 (1990), Sup Ct review
denied
376.155
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Proposed
point of connection is not practicable if way of necessity established by point
of connection cannot be maintained sufficiently to allow motor vehicle access
consistent with intended uses of benefited property. Petroff
v. Williams, 240 Or App 201, 246 P3d 39 (2010)
376.175
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
Landowner
who successfully appeals amount of damages awarded when land is burdened by way
of necessity is entitled to attorney fees. Brookshire v. Johnson, 274 Or 19,
544 P2d 164 (1976)
In general
This
section authorizes award of attorney fees on appeal by property owner or other
person claiming interest in property who successfully defends action for
statutory way of necessity. Pike v. Wyllie, 103 Or App 30, 795 P2d 1097 (1990),
Sup Ct review denied
Where
land is subject to petitioner’s action for way of necessity, attorney fees are
available even though land was not included in route proposed by petition.
Morgan v. Hart, 325 Or 348, 937 P2d 1024 (1997)
376.180
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute
Way
of necessity must be open to public use. Aylett v. Mardis,
59 Or App 109, 650 P2d 165 (1982), Sup Ct review denied
In general
Where
petitioner’s land does not abut highway, this section requires petitioners to
show they lack easement so as to show need for way of necessity. Witten v.
Murphy, 71 Or App 511, 692 P2d 715 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
Where
petitioners have existing enforceable access to public road, they are not
entitled to way of necessity under this section, notwithstanding state of
repair of such access. Pike v. Wyllie, 100 Or App 120, 785 P2d 764 (1990), Sup
Ct review denied
Burden
of showing inability to acquire easement for access through other legal action
rests on petitioner. Tyska v. Prest,
163 Or App 219, 988 P2d 392 (1999)
376.705 to 376.825
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Application of
Ballot Measure 47 (Oregon Constitution Article XI, section 11 g) to issuance of
bonds for specific local improvements, (1996) Vol 48,
p 67