105.505
Remedies available for private nuisance. Any person whose property or personal enjoyment
thereof is affected by a private nuisance, may maintain an action for damages
therefor. If judgment is given for the plaintiff in the action, the plaintiff
may, on motion, in addition to the execution to enforce the judgment, obtain an
order allowing a warrant to issue to the sheriff to abate the nuisance. The
motion must be made at the term at which judgment is given, and shall be
allowed of course, unless it appears on the hearing that the nuisance has ceased
or that such remedy is inadequate to abate or prevent the continuance of the
nuisance, in which latter case the plaintiff may proceed to have the defendant
enjoined. [Amended by 1979 c.284 §96]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2023 · leading case:
Ainsworth v. Owenby, 326 F. Supp. 3d 1111 (D. Or. 2018).
Ainsworth v. Owenby, 326 F. Supp. 3d 1111 (D. Or. 2018).
· cites it 2× “Or. Rev. Stat. § 105.505 (codifying the distinction between damages from injuries to "property" and the "personal enjoyment thereof").”
Thornburg v. Port of Portland, 376 P.2d 100 (Or. 1962).
· cites it 2× “, and ORS 105.505, et seq. This court ought not to exceed its powers to establish a different policy.”
Wilson v. Parent, 365 P.2d 72 (Or. 1961).
· cites it 2× “Our conclusion is in harmony with the apparent intent of the Oregon statute which deals with actions for damages for private nuisance and appears to limit the right to the owner or possessor. “Any person whose property or personal enjoyment thereof is affected by a private…”
Catellus Dev. Corp. v. L.D. McFarland Co., 910 F. Supp. 1509 (D. Or. 1995).
“nd wastes; (9) Ninth Claim — SPTCo was negligent because it knew or reasonably should have known that releases of hazardous substances and wastes occurred on the Property as a result of McFarland’s operations which were not adequately cleaned up; (10) Tenth Claim — as a result…”
Turudic v. Stephens, 31 P.3d 465 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“on plaintiffs’ first claim for declaratory and injunctive relief and plaintiffs second claim for breach of contract; (2) entered judgment for plaintiffs on defendants’ first counterclaim for an injunction for nuisance under the CCRs and on defendants Stephens’ and Albin’s fourth…”
Birdnest Mobile Estates v. MCH Prop. Mgmt., 524 P.3d 993 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“320, by allowing the tenants’ space to become “inundated with filth and contaminated sewage and soil”; and (3) a private nuisance claim pursuant to ORS 105.505. On September 6, 2018, the trial court in the Tenant Suit entered a judgment in favor of the tenants and against…”
Harshbarger v. Klamath Cnty., 432 P.3d 363 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“Plaintiff sued the county for nuisance, ORS 105.505, and timber trespass, ORS 105.”
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.