105.705 Right
to bring action; filing of judgment.
(1) When any dispute or controversy exists between owners of adjacent or
contiguous lands in this state, concerning the boundary lines thereof, or the
location of the line dividing such lands, any party to the dispute or
controversy may bring an action in the circuit court in the county where all or
part of the lands are situated, for the purpose of having the controversy or
dispute determined, and the boundary line or dividing line ascertained and
marked by proper monuments upon the ground where such line is ascertained.
(2) Upon final
determination of the dispute by the court, the clerk of the court shall file
one copy of the judgment in the office of the county surveyor, one copy in the
office of the county assessor and one copy in the office of the county officer
who keeps the records of deeds for recording in the county deed records. [Amended
by 1965 c.24 §1; 1979 c.284 §97]
Notes of Decisions
Brunswick v. Rundell, 869 P.2d 886 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 2× “In the alternative, they asked for a boundary determination under ORS 105.705. The trial court found that “Jim Whipple and [Michael] Rundell agreed, at least impliedly, that the fence line to be built by [Michael] Rundell would be the boundary.”
Foster v. Gibbons, 33 P.3d 329 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“Plaintiff also asserted three counterclaims: (1) trespass, based on plaintiffs alleged wrongful occupancy of the disputed area; (2) establishment of boundary lines pursuant to ORS 105.705 to ORS 105.725; and (3) attorney fees under the parties’ land sale contract.”
Nelson v. Vandemarr, 573 P.2d 1232 (Or. 1978).
“Plaintiffs brought this suit pursuant to ORS 105.705 to 105.725 to determine the correct boundary line.”
Purvine v. Hathaway, 393 P.2d 181 (Or. 1964).
“This is a suit in equity brought under ORS 105.705 to establish a boundary line between the lands of plaintiffs and defendants.”
Sullivan v. Johnson, 964 P.2d 270 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 6× “Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in which the trial court partially granted plaintiffs claim for adverse possession, denied plaintiffs request to establish a boundary pursuant to ORS 105.705, and awarded defendants damages for trespass.”
Smejkal v. Rice, 543 P.2d 271 (Or. 1975).
· cites it 3× “This is a suit in equity to establish a boundary line between the two parcels pursuant to ORS 105.705 et seq. Both sides appeal from the decree of the trial court fixing the location of the line.”
Bean v. Kmetic, 580 P.2d 1022 (Or. 1978).
“This is a boundary dispute proceeding brought pursuant to ORS 105.705 to 105.725. The following diagram, not to scale, illustrates the area in controversy.”
Jensen v. Westenskow, 357 P.2d 383 (Or. 1960).
“This is a suit in equity brought pursuant to ORS 105.705 to 105.725 to establish the boundary line between the lands of the plaintiff and of the defendants.”
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.