Legal Win: Oregon Court of Appeals Restores Common Sense in Carroll v. Lane County

Oregon property owners can finally breathe a sigh of relief after a crucial ruling by the Oregon Court of Appeals in late May. In Carroll v. Lane County, the Court overturned a baffling decision by the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), reaffirming what should have been obvious all along- if someone divided their land by selling a portion of it, the portion they kept for themselves was still a “legal” parcel.

While this may sound like a niche concern, for property owners, the legality of a parcel is everything. In Oregon, an illegal parcel is practically worthless— it can’t be sold, developed, or even used by the current owner. It’s land in name only.

The problem? Determining a parcel’s legality isn’t always straightforward. Owners often have to trace back decades (sometimes over a century) to confirm whether the original creation followed the law. In rural Oregon, where land changes hands many times, this can be a nightmare.

And worse still, some anti-development groups weaponize the “illegal parcel” argument to block rural housing. For them, it’s not about fairness to the landowner— it’s about shutting down growth at any cost.

The Carroll Case: A Legal Bombshell

For 116 years, the Carroll parcel was considered unquestionably legal. It had been bought and sold multiple times without issue—until December 2024, when LUBA dropped a legal grenade, ruling for the first time that the land was illegal. The decision stunned attorneys across the state.

LUBA’s reasoning? In order to be legal, a parcel had to be surveyed, described in a deed, and recorded in the county deed records. No record of that process? The land is illegal. Sounds neat and tidy, but in practice, it was a disaster.

For centuries, Oregon landowners have engaged in simple, straightforward property sales. A rancher buys part of his neighbor’s farm, hires a surveyor, drafts a deed, pays for the land, and records the deed. A routine transaction, right? Not according to LUBA. Under its ruling, the seller should have also drafted a separate deed for the land he kept— even though he wasn’t selling it.

That defies all logic. Why would a farmer draft a deed conveying his own land to himself? And if he had gone to record that deed, the county clerk would have laughed him out of the office. Yet LUBA insisted that this absurd requirement was the only legal option.

OPOA Steps Up & the Court of Appeals Weighs In

Recognizing the chaos this ruling would unleash, the property owners appealed, and the OPOA Legal Center weighed in with an amicus brief. We urged the Court to reject LUBA’s misguided interpretation and thankfully, they listened.

The Court of Appeals put an end to the madness. In its ruling, the Court made it crystal clear:

Oregon law has never required a property owner to hire a surveyor and record a deed for the portion of land they’re keeping. That common-sense decision ensures Oregon landowners can continue to rely on centuries-old legal principles without fear of bureaucratic landmines.

This decision isn’t just a win for Carroll— it’s a win for every property owner in Oregon.

The opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not represent the opinions or positions of any party represented by the OPOA Legal Center on any particular matter.