Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kraft v. Estate of Cooper

Court of Appeals of Oregon

June 11, 2014

JEFFREY KRAFT and ANGELA SCHMIEDE, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
ESTATE OF JOHN RONALD COOPER, SR.; et al, Defendants, and CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF OREGON, Defendant-Respondent. JEFFREY KRAFT and ANGELA SCHMIEDE, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
ESTATE OF JOHN RONALD COOPER, SR.; et al, Defendants, and ANTHONY W. FURNISS, in his capacity as Personal Representative of the Estate of John Ronald Cooper, Deceased, Defendant-Respondent

Argued and Submitted December 18, 2012.

Multnomah County Circuit Court 100304347. Thomas M. Christ, Judge pro tempore. (Limited Judgment entered January 13, 2011), Charles E. Corrigan, Judge pro tempore. (Limited Judgments entered April 18, 2011, and September 2, 2011).

Margaret H. Leek Leiberan argued the cause for appellants. With her on the briefs was Jensen & Leiberan.

Matthew Cleverley argued the cause for respondent Chicago Title Insurance Company of Oregon. With him on the brief was Fidelity National Law Group.

Glen S. Shearer argued the cause for respondent Anthony W. Furniss. With him on the brief was Furniss, Shearer & Leineweber.

Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Duncan, Judge, and Brewer, Judge pro tempore.

OPINION

Page 640

[263 Or.App. 422] ARMSTRONG, P. J.

Plaintiffs challenge on appeal separate grants of summary judgment for defendant Chicago Title Insurance Company of Oregon

Page 641

(Chicago Title) and defendant Anthony Furniss, in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of John Ronald Cooper (Cooper). At its heart, the issue in this case is whether the legal description in a warranty deed from Cooper to plaintiffs was an accurate description of the property conveyed. We agree with the trial court that it was and affirm.

On review of grants of summary judgment, we review the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and draw all reasonable factual inferences in that party's favor. Jones v. General Motors Corp., 325 Ore. 404, 408, 939 P.2d 608 (1997). The background facts are undisputed and set out below. When necessary to our disposition, we discuss elsewhere in this opinion in more detail the evidence produced on summary judgment with respect to each summary-judgment motion because those motions were decided at different times and on different records.

Plaintiffs purchased a historic home on a large lot in Portland from Cooper, who at the time of the transaction was still living. Cooper was represented in the transaction by his son John, a real estate agent with Realty Trust. The handout for the historic home stated, as one of the home's " [f]eatures," that " [the p]roperty sits on 6 Lots," and the RMLS listing included as part of the " private" information that " [t]he property offers 6 city lots." Plaintiffs and Cooper entered into a purchase agreement for the property that provided,

" Neither Seller nor any Licensee(s) warrant the square footage of any structure or the size of any land being purchased. If square footage or land size is a material consideration, all structures and land should be measured by Buyer prior to signing or ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.