Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 105.405

Costs and expenses of partition

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      105.405 Costs and expenses of partition. (1) The expenses of the referees, including those of a surveyor and assistants of the surveyor when employed, shall be ascertained and allowed by the court, and the amount thereof, together with the fees allowed by law to the referees, shall be paid by the plaintiff, and may be allowed as part of the costs of partition.

      (2) The reasonable costs of partition, including reasonable attorney fees and disbursements, that are for services performed for the common benefit of all parties, shall be paid by the parties that will share in the lands divided in proportion to their respective interests therein, and shall be included and specified in the judgment. They shall be a lien on the several shares, and the judgment may be enforced by execution against the parties separately. When, however, a controversy arises between some of the parties only, the court may require the expense of such controversy to be paid by any of, or all, the parties thereto. [Amended by 1971 c.502 §1; 2003 c.576 §368]

 

HOUSING RECEIVERSHIP

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1965–2003 · leading case: Adamson v. Adamson
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Adamson v. Adamson (1975) or · cites it 2× “Plaintiff contends that this is a partition suit and she is entitled to attorney fees as provided in ORS 105.405. ⑦ *396 In Brusco v. Brusco, 241 Or 550, 555 , 407 P2d 645 (1965), a partition suit, plaintiff contended that the trial court erred in failing to award attorney fees…”
In re the Marriage of Truax (1983) orctapp “(l)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(l)(h) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
Haggerty v. Nobles (1966) or “Costs on this appeal will be apportioned among the parties according to their respective interests in the lands divided: ORS 105.405 (2); Reeder v. Reeder, 68 Or 163, 170 , 135 P 176 , 137 P 191 .”
Brusco v. Brusco (1965) or “ORS 105.405 (2) provides : “The costs of partition, including * * * reasonable attorney fees to be determined by the court for services performed for the common benefit of all parties and other disbursements, shall be paid by the parties entitled to share in the lands divided in…”
In re the Marriage of Maresh (2003) orctapp “105(6) (providing for supplemental proceedings after dissolution judgment for partition of undivided interests in property and prescribing procedure provided in ORS 105.405, the general partition statute).”
Maupin v. Opie (1998) orctapp · cites it 2× “” ORS 105.405(2). On December 16, 1996, defendants filed their answer, reiterating that “great prejudice” would result from partition in kind or public sale: “The highest and best use of the Property is as a commercial livestock family operation, the fee and leased lands are…”
State ex rel. Moreau v. Moreau (1987) orctapp “(l)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(l)(i) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
Hellesvig v. Hellesvig (1982) orctapp · cites it 2× “205 and ORS 105.405, with the dissolution partition statute, ORS 107.”
Hellesvig v. Hellesvig (1983) or “either party may maintain supplemental proceedings by filing a petition in such suit for the partition of such real or personal property, or both, within two years from the entry of said decree, showing among other things that the original parties to such decree and their joint…”
In re the Marriage of Bond (1983) orctapp “(1)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(1)(h) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
Kilian v. City of West Linn (1987) orctapp “205 to ORS 105.405. See Ogan v. Ellison, 297 Or 25 , 682 P2d 760 (1984).”
In re the Marriage of Teeter (1976) orctapp “erty, or both, either party may maintain supplemental proceedings by filing a petition in such suit for the partition of such real or personal property, or both, within two years from the entry of said decree, showing among other things that the original parties to such decree…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 105.405(2) — 4 cases
In re the Marriage of Truax (1983) orctapp “(l)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(l)(h) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
Maupin v. Opie (1998) orctapp “” ORS 105.405(2). On December 16, 1996, defendants filed their answer, reiterating that “great prejudice” would result from partition in kind or public sale: “The highest and best use of the Property is as a commercial livestock family operation, the fee and leased lands are…”
State ex rel. Moreau v. Moreau (1987) orctapp “(l)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(l)(i) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
In re the Marriage of Bond (1983) orctapp “(1)(a) ORS 105.405(2) or 107.105(1)(h) provide the substantive right to such items; or “C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.