2017 ORS 223.575¹
Legal and evidentiary effect of deed

The effect of the deed shall be to convey to the grantee therein named the legal and equitable title in fee simple, to the real property described in the deed, excepting only the lien of a local government on such assessments or liens as were not included in the foreclosure proceedings. The deed shall be prima facie evidence of title in the grantee, except as stated in this section, and that all proceedings and acts necessary to make such deed in all respects good and valid have been had and done. Such prima facie evidence shall not be disputed, overcome or rebutted, or the effect thereof avoided, except by satisfactory proof of either:

(1) Fraud in making the final assessment or in the final assessment, or in the procuring of the lien.

(2) Payment of the final assessment or lien before sale or redemption after sale.

(3) That payment or redemption was prevented by fraud of the purchaser.

(4) That the property was sold for a lien or final assessment for which neither the property nor its owner, at the time of sale, was liable, and that no part of the final assessment or lien was assessed or levied upon the property sold. [Amended by 1991 c.902 §67; 2003 c.802 §43]

Notes of Decisions

Because city failed to give notice of proposed foreclosure sale to lienholder, lien was not included in foreclosure pro­ceed­ing and purchaser took prop­erty subject to lien. Director of Veterans’ Affairs v. Myers, 114 Or App 291, 835 P2d 137 (1992)

Law Review Cita­tions

52 OLR 175-189 (1973)

Chapter 223

Notes of Decisions

Fact that ordinance, which charged fee to prop­erty owners taking advantage of privilege of making connec­tion to city wa­ter system, specified that pay­ment would be secured by liens which would be “enforced” in matter provided by this chapter did not, of itself, show that such charges were “assess­ments.” Montgomery Brothers v. City of Corvallis, 34 Or App 785, 580 P2d 190 (1978)

Circuit court has jurisdic­tion to determine merits of assess­ment, but cannot address whether assess­ment is subject to constitu­tional limits on prop­erty taxes. Martin v. City of Tigard, 14 OTR 517 (1999), aff’d 335 Or 444, 72 P3d 619 (2003)

State statutory pro­ce­dures for financing local improve­ments are not exclusive and do not displace consistent local pro­ce­dures. Baker v. City of Woodburn, 190 Or App 445, 79 P3d 901 (2003), Sup Ct review denied

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 223—Local Improvements and Works Generally, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors223.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 223, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano223.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.