When double damages are awarded for trespass
- exception
Source:
Section 105.815 — When double damages are awarded for trespass; exception, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors105.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Under this section a person who has a real property interest which the law recognizes as entitled to protection is an owner of land. Pedro v. January, 261 Or 582, 494 P2d 868 (1972)
Plaintiff with a future contingent interest in land is allowed recovery under this section. Pedro v. January, 261 Or 582, 494 P2d 868 (1972)
Use of the word “trespass” does not require a possessory interest in one who seeks recovery under this section. Pedro v. January, 261 Or 582, 494 P2d 868 (1972)
This section does not apply to injuries to fruit crops and trees caused by fumes emitted from defendant’s aluminum plant. Meyer v. Harvey Alum., 263 Or 487, 501 P2d 795 (1972)
Where defendant’s title to disputed parcel of property had matured by adverse possession, doctrine of relation-back applied to prevent recovery under this section. Breuer v. Covert, 47 Or App 225, 614 P2d 1169 (1980), Sup Ct review denied
Stipulated value of timber itself is proper base for computing double damages under this section and cost of logging should have not been included. Sinsel v. Henderson, 62 Or App 150, 660 P2d 1072 (1983)
Where defendant log hauler did not enter, hire others to enter or act in concert with those entering plaintiff’s land, defendant was not liable for timber trespass. Bergman v. Holden, 118 Or App 530, 848 P2d 141 (1993), as modified by 122 Or App 257, 857 P2d 217 (1993)
“Casual or involuntary” trespass does not require showing of negligence. Wyatt v. Sweitz, 146 Or App 723, 934 P2d 544 (1997)
Term “trespass” refers to unauthorized injury to or severance of produce or timber. Simington Gardens, LLC v. Rock Ridge Farms, LLC, 308 Or App 661, 481 P3d 396 (2021)
Law Review Citations
36 WLR 401 (2000)