Crum v. Siems
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
The Crums filed a timely notice of appeal, raising the following points: (1) the circuit court erred in not finding that the line of trees and the eastern edge of the turn-row established a boundary by acquiescence,2 and (2) the circuit court erred in its alternative finding that the Crums did not acquire title to the property through adverse possession.
Boundary-line cases are reviewed de novo. Durham v. McCone , 2018 Ark. App. 392, at 3, 555 S.W.3d 907, 909. However, our court will not reverse findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. A finding of fact is clearly erroneous…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Myers v. YinglingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008
- Boyette v. VogelpohlCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
- Clark v. CasebierCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
- Lammey v. EckelCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998
- Fulkerson v. Van BurenCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mark Waggoner v. Daniel Alford and Jennifer AlfordCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2021
- Snc Revocable Trust v. Gerardo R. Galdamez and Amy B. GaldamezCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2023