reforming deed on ground of mutual mistake to include easement
How later courts described this case
- reforming deed on ground of mutual mistake to include easement
- “There is a strong presumption that a deed expresses what the parties had in mind[.]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JOSEPH, C. J.,
dissenting.
The trial judge found Osborn more credible “on the whole.” I would need to be more convinced of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of Osborn before I could conclude that Foster intended to grant him an easement through her house — and one 60 feet wide at that. Osborn’s failure to talk to her about the supposed mistake, his quick profit 1 and his failure to produce the critical witness from the title company hardly support his creditworthiness. Without the credibility factor, his reformation claim fails. See Steiner v. SAIF, 34 Or App 317 , 578 P2d 497 (1978). I therefore dissent.
He paid Mrs. Foster $26,000 for a deed without the easement. About a year later he sold to the Walshes by a deed with the easement for $86,000.