Anderson v. Fautin
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Chief Justice Durrant,
opinion of the Court:
Introduction
{ 1 This case raises a single legal question: does the occupation element in our boundary by acquiescence doctrine require a claimant to prove that both owners of adjoining land cecupied their respective parcels up to a visible line? Terral E. Anderson, the petitioner, owns a vacant parcel adjoining respondent Janet Fautin's parcel, Mr. Anderson failed to visit or inspect his property for a twenty-six year period. During that time, Ms. Fautin occupied her parcel up to a fence dividing the properties. A subsequent survey showed that the…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Orvis v. JohnsonUtah Supreme Court · 2008
- Cal Wadsworth Construction v. City of St. GeorgeUtah Supreme Court · 1995
- Bahr v. ImusUtah Supreme Court · 2011
- Orton v. CarterUtah Supreme Court · 1998
- Staker v. AinsworthUtah Supreme Court · 1990
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Linebaugh v. GibsonCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2020
- Pioneer Home v. TaxHawkCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2019
- Hansen v. Kurry Jensen PropertiesCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2021
- Magleby v. SchnibbeUtah Supreme Court · 2024
- B.G.T.S. v. Balls Brothers FarmCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2024
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.