Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Fautin

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided June 26, 2014No. 20120972-CAPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ROTH, Judge:

T1 This boundary dispute case raises a single issue concerning the application of the doctrine of boundary by acquiescence: must the claimant show active use of the land on both sides of a disputed boundary to satisfy the occupation element of the doctrine? The plaintiff purchased property in Piute County in 1968 and did not use it or visit it for more than two decades. The defendant owns adjacent property to the north where for more than twenty years she and prior owners had farmed and grazed livestock. In 2005, the plaintiff surveyed his land and then filed a quiet title…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Holmes Development, LLC v. CookUtah Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Bahr v. ImusUtah Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Orton v. CarterUtah Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Staker v. AinsworthUtah Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Ault v. HoldenUtah Supreme Court · 2002

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Anderson v. FautinUtah Supreme Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API