Rencken v. Young
Oregon Supreme Court
711 P.2d 954, 300 Or. 352 (1985)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
Rudolph G. Rencken (defendant) held appropriative water rights to divert water from the East Branch of Mud Creek to irrigate 10 acres of land during the agricultural irrigation season (March to October). Under Oregon law, the failure to exercise a water right for five successive years is conclusively presumed to be an abandonment of the water right. Rencken did not use his water right in 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982 except to irrigate a small garden (.1 acres). In 1983, Rencken created a small pond and installed a sump pump and irrigation system to irrigate the original 10 acres, but did not begin irrigation until November 1983, after the irrigation season. In an administrative proceeding brought by William Young (plaintiff), the water resources director, Young determined that Rencken had failed to exercise his water right for five successive years and, therefore, terminated Rencken’s water right except for the irrigation of the .1 acre garden. Rencken appealed, but the appellate court affirmed Young’s decision. Rencken appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Campbell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
