Title: Wels v. Hippe
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S063486
State: Oregon
Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court
Date: February 2, 2017

No. 4	
February 2, 2017	
807
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE 
STATE OF OREGON
John B. WELS, Jr.,
Respondent on Review,
v.
Douglas W. HIPPE,
Defendant,
and
Le Roy HIPPE 
and Cheryl Hippe,
Petitioners on Review.
(CC 101215E3; CA A150238; SC S063486)
On petition for reconsideration filed by petitioners on 
review December 5, 2016; considered and under advisement 
January 4, 2017.*
Clayton C. Patrick, Clatskanie, filed the petition for 
reconsideration for petitioners on review.
No appearance contra.
Before, Balmer, Chief Justice, and Kistler, Walters, 
Landau, Baldwin, and Brewer, Justices, and DeHoog, Judge 
of the Court of Appeals, Justice pro tempore.**
LANDAU, J.
The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The former 
opinion is modified and adhered to as modified.
Case Summary: In a claim for a prescriptive easement, the Supreme Court 
originally remanded the case to the circuit court for further proceedings. Held: 
the opinion of the Supreme Court is modified to remand the case to the circuit 
court for entry of judgment in defendants’ favor. The original opinion is adhered 
to as modified.
The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The former opinion is modified 
and adhered to as modified.
______________
	
**  360 Or 569, ____ P3d ____ (2016); 269 Or App 785, 347 P3d 788 (2015).
	
**  Nakamoto, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this 
case.
808	
Wels v. Hippe
	
LANDAU, J.
	
Defendants have petitioned for reconsideration of 
our opinion in Wels v. Hippe, 360 Or 569, ___ P3d ___ (2016). 
Defendants prevailed but seek clarification of our instruc-
tion remanding the case to the trial court for further pro-
ceedings. Defendants assert that this instruction requires 
the trial court to vacate its original judgment in favor of 
plaintiff and enter judgment in favor of defendants, rather 
than holding a new trial and allowing plaintiff to present 
further evidence. We agree that clarification is warranted as 
follows: The case is remanded to the circuit court for entry 
of judgment in defendants’ favor, and the award of costs is 
modified accordingly.
	
The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The for-
mer opinion is modified and adhered to as modified.