IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON MARK KRAMER and TODD PRAGER ...

106 Pages·2014·11.76 MB·English

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
MARK KRAMER and TODD PRAGER,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO; and the
Court of Appeals No. A156284
STATE OF OREGON, by and through

the State Land Board and the
Clackamas County Circuit Court
Department of State Lands,
Case No. CV12100913
Defendants-Respondents,
and
LAKE OSWEGO CORPORATION,
Intervenor-Defendant.

APPELLANTS’ OPENING BRIEF
AND EXCERPT OF RECORD

Appeal from the General Judgment Entered by the Clackamas County Circuit
Court on February 6, 2014; Honorable Henry C. Breithaupt, Judge.

Thane W. Tienson, OSB No. 773741 Gregory M. Adams, OSB No. 101779
[email protected] [email protected]
Landye Bennett Blumstein LLP Richardson Adams, PLLC
1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Ste. 3500 515 N. 27th St.
Portland, OR 97201 Boise, ID 83702
503.224.4100 208.938.2236
503.224.4133 (facsimile) 208.938.7904 (facsimile)
Of Attorneys for Appellants Of Attorneys for Appellants

July 2014
Anna Marie Joyce, OSB No. 013112 Brad S. Daniels, OSB No. 025178
[email protected] [email protected]
DOJ Appellate Division Daniel C. Occhipinti, OSB No. 084353
1162 Court St. NE [email protected]
Salem, OR 97301 Stoel Rives LLP
503.378-4402 900 SW 5th Avenue, Ste. 2600
503.378-6306 (facsimile) Portland, OR 97204
Of Attorneys for Respondent 503.224.3380
State of Oregon 503.220.2480 (facsimile)
Of Attorneys for Intervenor
Paul W. Conable, OSB No. 975368 Lake Oswego Corporation
[email protected]
Robyn Ridler Aoyagi, OSB No 000168
[email protected]
Tonkon Torp LLC
888 SW 5th Avenue, Ste. 1600
Portland, OR 97204
503.221.1440
503.274.8779 (facsimile)
Of Attorneys for Respondent
City of Lake Oswego
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................................ 1

A. Nature of the Case ....................................................................................... 1

B. Nature of the Judgment ............................................................................... 1

C. Basis for Appellate Jurisdiction ................................................................... 2

D. Date of Judgment and Notice of Appeal ...................................................... 2

E. Questions Presented on Appeal ................................................................... 2

F. Summary of the Argument ............................................................................ 3

G. Statement of Facts ........................................................................................ 5

1. History of Oswego Lake ........................................................................... 5

2. The Effort to Monopolize the Lake for Exclusive Use ............................ 6

3. The City’s Parks and the Prohibitions Against Public Use ...................... 8
a. The City’s swim park ........................................................................... 8
b. The City’s lakefront parks .................................................................... 8
c. Resolution 12-12 ................................................................................... 9
d. Effect on Plaintiffs’ rights .................................................................. 11

4. Plaintiffs’ Claims .................................................................................... 12

II. FIRST AND SECOND ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR ................................ 12

A. First Assignment of Error .......................................................................... 12

B. Second Assignment of Error ...................................................................... 13

C. Combined Preservation of Error ............................................................... 13

D. Combined Standard of Review ................................................................... 13

E. Argument on the First and Second Assignments of Error ......................... 14
ii

1. Oswego Lake Is Subject to Public Use Because It Is Navigable-In-
Fact and Is a Meandered Lake. .............................................................. 14
a. Oregon’s Public Trust Doctrine protects the right to use navigable
water bodies regardless of title to the bed. ........................................ 15
b. All meandered lakes in Oregon are public by statute. ...................... 17
c. Oswego Lake is a public lake subject to public use under Oregon’s
Public Trust Doctrine. ....................................................................... 18

2. Plaintiffs Possess the Right of Access to the Water From Public Parks,
Subject Only to Reasonable Use Restrictions. ...................................... 21

3. The Public Trust Doctrine Preempts the City’s Prohibitions Against
Public Use of the Lake Because Those Prohibitions Unreasonably
Monopolize Use of the Lake And Subject It to Private Interest. .......... 23

4. The City’s Lake Access Prohibitions Violate the Privileges and
Immunities Clause of the Oregon Constitution. .................................... 27
a. Article I, Section 20 prohibits creation of monopoly rights for local
residents. ............................................................................................ 28
b. The privileged right of use for Lake Corp members created by
Resolution 12-12, as applied, violates Article I, Section 20. ............ 30
c. The privileged right of use for City residents at the swim park
violates Article 1, Section 20. ........................................................... 31

5. Lake Corp’s Private Use Restrictions Are Ineffective and Provide
No Basis to Exclude the Public. ............................................................ 32
a. The circuit court erred by refusing to address the enforceability
of the property restrictions. ............................................................... 32
b. The property restrictions cannot defeat public access because
they are ineffective and unenforceable against the City. .................. 33

6. The State Has Abdicated Its Trust Duties and Placed the Trust
Beyond Its Control. ............................................................................... 37

III. THIRD ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR ........................................................... 38

A. Third Assignment of Error ......................................................................... 38

B. Preservation of Error ................................................................................. 38
iii

C. Standard of Review .................................................................................... 38

D. Argument on Third Assignment of Error ................................................... 39
1. Plaintiffs Properly Sought Leave to Amend the Complaint to
Conform to the Arguments and Evidence. ............................................ 39
2. The Circuit Court Abused Its Discretion By Refusing to Allow
Plaintiffs’ Amendments. ........................................................................ 40

IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 41

EXCERPT OF RECORD
iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Cases

Alum. Cooking Utensil Co. v. City of North Bend, 210 Or 412,
311 P2d 464 (1957) ................................................................................ 30, 31

Ariz. Center For Law In Public Interest v. Hassell,
172 Ariz 356, 837 P2d 158 (1991) .............................................................. 26

Brock v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Insur. Co., 195 Or App 519,
98 P3d 759 (2004) .................................................................................. 13, 14

Brusco Towboat v. State Land Bd., 284 Or 627, 589 P2d 712 (1978) ........ 24

Buchanan v. Wood, 79 Or App 722, 720 P2d 1285 (1986) ......................... 23

Capano v. Borough of Stone Harbor, 530 F Supp 1254 (D.N.J. 1982) ...... 31

Capitol Fed. Savings & Loan Assn. v. Smith, 136 Colo 265,
316 P.2d 252 (Colo. 1957) ........................................................................... 36

Chernaik v. Kitzhaber, __ Or ___, ___ P3d ___
(June 11, 2014) (slip op) .................................................................. 14, 24, 37

City of Madison v. Tolzman, 7 Wis 2d 570, 97 NW 2d 513 (1959) ............ 25

City of Maitland v. Orlando Bassmasters Assn. of Orlando, Flor., Inc.,
431 So 2d 178 (Fla. 5th Dist. App. 1983) .................................................... 31

Darling v. Christensen, 166 Or 17,
109 P2d 585 (1941) .............................................. 4, 22, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 41

Ellis v. Ferrellgas, L.P., 211 Or App 648, 156 P3d 136 (2007) ................. 14

Engelcke v. Stoehsler, 273 Or 937, 544 P2d 582 (1975) ............................. 40

Ford v. Or. Elec. Ry. Co., 60 Or 278, 117 P 809 (1911) ....................... 35, 36

Guilliams v. Beaver Lake Club, 90 Or 13, 175 P 437 (1918) ...................... 16
v

Holmes v. Oregon Assn. of Credit Management, Inc., 52 Or App 551,
628 P2d 1264, rev den 291 Or 771 (1981) .................................................. 41

Huse v. Glover, 119 US 543, 7 S Ct 313, 30 L Ed 487 (1886) ................... 24

Hussey v. Huntsinger, 72 Or App 565, 696 P2d 580 (1985) ....................... 33

Ideal Tea Co. v. City of Salem, 77 Or 182, 150 P 852 (1915) ............... 30, 31

Illinois Central R.R. Co. v. State of Illinois,
146 US 387, 13 S Ct 110, 36 L Ed 1018 (1892) .................................... 37, 38

LaGrande/Astoria v. Pub. Employees Retirement Bd., 281 Or 137,
576 P2d 1204, on reh’g, 284 Or 173 (1978) ............................................... 23

Lebanon Lumber Co. v. Leonard, 68 Or 147, 136 P 891 (1913)................. 21

Luscher v. Reynolds, 153 Or 625, 56 P2d 1158 (1936) ............. 17, 18, 19, 20

Kamm v. Normand, 50 Or 9, 91 P 448 (1907) ............................................. 20

Mendiola v. Graham, 139 Or 592, 10 P2d 911 (1932) .................... 29, 30, 31

Mendota Club v. Anderson, 101 Wis 479, 78 NW 185 (1899) ................... 19

Monroe v. Withycombe, 84 Or 328, 165 P 227 (1917) ................................ 29

National Audubon Society v. Superior Court, 33 Cal 3d 419,
658 P2d 709 (1983) ................................................................................ 26, 27

Neptune City v. Avon-by-the-Sea, 61 NJ 296, 294 A2d 47 (1972) .............. 25

Northwest Steelheaders Assn., Inc. v. Simantel, 199 Or App 471,
112 P3d 383 (2005), rev den, 339 Or 407 (2005),
cert den, 547 US 1003 (2006) ...................................................................... 15

Parks v. Cooper, 2004 SD 27, 676 NW2d 823 (2004) ................................ 17

Pendleton School Dist. v. State of Oregon, 345 Or 596,
200 P3d 133 (2009) ...................................................................................... 14
vi

People ex rel. Scott v. Chicago Park Dist., 66 Ill 2d 65,
360 NE 2d 773 (Ill. 1976) ............................................................................ 26

PPL Montana, LLC v. Montana, ___ US ___, 132 S Ct 1215,
182 L Ed 2d 77 (2012) ........................................................................... 15, 18

Public Lands Access Assn v. Board of County Commnrs. of Madison Cnty.,
373 Mont 277, 321 P3d 38 (2014) ............................................................... 22

Rasmussen v. Walker Warehouse, Inc., 68 Or 316, 136 P 661 (1913) ........ 35

Safeport, Inc. v. Equipment Roundup & Mfg., Inc., 184 Or App 690,
60 P3d 1076 (2002), rev den 335 Or 255 (2003) ............................. 39, 40, 41

Sea Isle City v. Caterina, 123 NJ Super 422, 303 A.2d 351
(N.J. Super. L. Div., 1973)........................................................................... 31

Seto v. Tri–County Metro. Transportation Dist., 311 Or 456,
814 P2d 1060 (1991) .................................................................................... 29

Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 68 S Ct 836, 92 L Ed 1161 (1948) ........... 36

Springfield Utility Bd. v. Emerald People’s Utility Dist., 339 Or 631,
125 P3d 740 (2005) ...................................................................................... 23

State Land Bd. v. Corvallis Sand & Gravel Co., 283 Or 147,
582 P2d 1352 (1978) .................................................................................... 15

State v. Isom, 313 Or 391, 837 P2d 491 (1992) ........................................... 30

State v. Savage, 96 Or 53, 184 P 567 (1919) ......................................... 28, 29

State v. Savastano, 354 Or 64, 309 P3d 1083 (2013) .................................. 30

State v. Vogt, 341 NJ Super 407, 775 A2d 551
(N.J. Super. App. Div., 2001) ...................................................................... 27

U.S. v. Oregon, 295 US 1, 55 S Ct 610, 79 L Ed 1267 (1935) .............. 17, 18

Village of Pewaukee v. Savoy, 103 Wis 271, 79 NW 436 (1899) ............... 22
vii

Weise v. Smith, 3 Or 445 (1869) ...................................................... 16, 21, 35

Wilbour v. Gallagher, 77 Wash 2d 306, 462 P2d 232 (1969),
cert den, 400 US 878 (1970) ........................................................................ 19

Wood v. Honeyman, 178 Or 484, 169 P2d 131 (1946) ................................ 37

Wright v. Incline Village General Improvement Dist.,
665 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2011) ............................................................... 36, 37

Zack’s, Inc. v. City of Sausalito, 165 Cal App 4th 1163
(Cal. App. 1st Dist., 2008) ........................................................................... 26

Constitutional and Statutory Provisions

Act of Feb. 14, 1859, ch. 33, 11 Stat. 383 ....................................... 15, 16, 24

Or Const, Art I, § 20 .................................... 1, 3, 4, 12, 13, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

Or Const, Art XI, § 2 ................................................................................... 23

ORS 19.205 ................................................................................................... 2

ORS 19.270 ................................................................................................... 2

ORS 28.010 to 28.140 .................................................................................... 1

ORS 28.070 ................................................................................................... 2

ORS 274.425 ................................................................................................ 17

ORS 274.430 ...................................................................... 2, 4, 17, 18, 20, 24

ORS 830.110 ................................................................................................ 20

ORS 830.175 ................................................................................................ 20

Or Laws 1967, ch. 421, §§ 131-132 ............................................................ 18
viii

Treatises

Restatement (Third) of Property (Servitudes) § 3.1 (2000) ......................... 35

Other Authorities

J. Sax, The Public Trust Doctrine in Natural Resource Law:
Effective Judicial Intervention, 68 Mich L Rev 471 (1970) ........................ 26

OAR 250-020-0031 ..................................................................................... 20

ORCP 23B ................................................................................................. 40

ORCP 47C ................................................................................................. 13

ORCP 47E ................................................................................................. 20

29 Or Op Atty Gen 296 (1959) .............................................................. 20, 24

29 Op Atty Gen 311 (1959) ......................................................................... 29