Nevius v. Palomares

To determine whether plaintiff stated a claim, there must be allegations which are legally sufficient to establish the existence of a justiciable controversy, a challenge becomes moot when a court decision will not have a practical effect on the rights of parties.

Plaintiff filed for declaratory and injunctive relief asserting Defendant refused to comply with the terms of an easement. The trial court dismissed Plaintiff when Defendant moved to dismiss under ORCP 21 A(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and ORCP 21 A(8) for failure to state ultimate facts sufficient to constitute a claim for relief but the trial court did not give a reason. To determine whether plaintiff stated a claim, there must be allegations which are legally sufficient to establish the existence of a justiciable controversy, a challenge becomes moot when a court decision will not have a practical effect on the rights of parties. The trial court erred because there was still a justiciable issue of material fact. Defendant’s contended that once they learned of the easement, they complied but offered no declarations, affidavits or binding concessions confirming they are legally required to comply with the easement. Defendants have not affirmatively agreed to follow the terms of the easement. Reversed and remanded.