Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Cent. Or. Fabricators, Inc. v. Hudspeth

Oregon Court of Appeals
977 P.2d 416 (Or. Ct. App. 1999)


Facts

In 1964, Hudspeth Land and Livestock Company conveyed a 24,000-acre property to Central Oregon Fabricators, Inc. (COF) (plaintiff). COF then conveyed the hunting and fishing rights to the land to Fred Hudspeth and his family (plaintiffs). The deed also allowed the Hudspeths to bring personal guests to hunt. Jack Rhoden, the principal owner of COF, constructed barriers around the property and had guards patrol it during the hunting season. Starting in 1989, Rhoden and his sons operated a hunting business on the property, charging up to $5,000 for guided hunting trips. Meanwhile, only one of the Hudspeths hunted on the property between 1964 and 1995, and only on one occasion. In 1995, some of the Hudspeths assigned their hunting and fishing rights to F & M Realty Company, Inc. (F & M). F & M, along with the Hudspeths who had retained their rights, developed plans to assign the hunting and fishing rights to others in exchange for yearly payments. COF, concerned that this would interfere with its hunting business, filed suit to quiet title. The trial court determined that the Hudspeths’ rights could not be assigned to F & M, that the Hudspeths could not assign their rights to multiple people, and that the Hudspeths could only bring personal guests rather than paying guests. The trial court also determined that the Hudspeths had abandoned their rights by 1988 through their failure to object to Rhoden’s construction of barriers around the property, and that Rhoden had acquired the hunting and fishing rights through adverse possession. The Hudspeths appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Haselton, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 203,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.