Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Luthy finds that the trial court relied on the wrong standard in rejecting a boundary by acquiescence claim to a disputed strip of land. Evidence that the claimant's predecessor-in-interest had used the strip for at least 20 years and its neighbor's predecessor-in-interest had not complained satisfied the mutual acquiescence element. But the claim fails nonetheless because the claimant failed to show that its predecessor had conveyed the title to the strip to the claimant. Reversed.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.