From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chase v. Henderson

Oregon Supreme Court
May 17, 1973
265 Or. 431 (Or. 1973)

Summary

In Chase, decided about a year-and-a-half after Meyer, the Supreme Court applied the holding of Meyer to an action seeking double, rather than triple, damages.

Summary of this case from Sunshine Farm, LLC v. Glaser

Opinion

Argued February 7, 1973

Modified May 17, 1973

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lane County.

ROLAND K. RODMAN, Judge.

MODIFIED.

Asa L. Lewelling, Salem, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

Robert D. Woods, Eugene, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Riddlesbarger, Pederson, Young Horn, Eugene.

Before O'CONNELL, Chief Justice, and McALLISTER, DENECKE, HOWELL and BRYSON, Justices.


Plaintiffs recovered a judgment for damages to their annual pole bean crop allegedly caused by the drift of a chemical spray which defendant applied from a helicopter to a nearby pasture. Defendant appeals.

The case was submitted to the jury upon the theory of unintentional, non-negligent trespass. In Loe v. Lenhardt, 227 Or. 242, 362 P.2d 312 (1961), we specifically held that the spraying of chemicals was an ultrahazardous activity and the sprayer was liable if the chemicals went on another's land and caused damage regardless of the absence of intention or negligence. Defendant's attempts to distinguish Loe v. Lenhardt, supra ( 227 Or. 242), are unsuccessful.

Being of the opinion that ORS 105.815 applied, the trial court doubled the actual damages found by the jury. Defendant contends that statute is not applicable.

After the trial in this case we decided Meyer v. Harvey Aluminum, Inc., 263 Or. 487, 501 P.2d 795, 799-800 (1972). We held ORS 105.810, the companion statute to ORS 105.815, did not permit the trebling of damages. In that case the plaintiffs' fruit crop and trees were allegedly damaged by emissions from the defendant's aluminum plant. The same considerations which caused us to conclude that treble damages were not allowable in such a case cause us to conclude that double damages are not allowable in this case.

Modified with instructions to enter judgment in the amount awarded by the jury.


Summaries of

Chase v. Henderson

Oregon Supreme Court
May 17, 1973
265 Or. 431 (Or. 1973)

In Chase, decided about a year-and-a-half after Meyer, the Supreme Court applied the holding of Meyer to an action seeking double, rather than triple, damages.

Summary of this case from Sunshine Farm, LLC v. Glaser
Case details for

Chase v. Henderson

Case Details

Full title:CHASE ET UX, Respondents, v. HENDERSON, Appellant

Court:Oregon Supreme Court

Date published: May 17, 1973

Citations

265 Or. 431 (Or. 1973)
509 P.2d 1188

Citing Cases

Sunshine Farm, LLC v. Glaser

In the sole assignment of error, plaintiff claims that the trial court incorrectly required plaintiff to…

Vandehey v. Munger Bros.

Defendants argue that, under Oregon Supreme Court precedent, plaintiff cannot bring a timber trespass claim…