Legal Opinion

Crum v. Siems

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided April 17, 2019No. CV-18-863PublishedCited by 2 opinions

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

  1. Myers v. YinglingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008
  2. Boyette v. VogelpohlCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
  3. Clark v. CasebierCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
  4. Lammey v. EckelCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998
  5. Fulkerson v. Van BurenCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mark Waggoner v. Daniel Alford and Jennifer AlfordCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2021
  2. Snc Revocable Trust v. Gerardo R. Galdamez and Amy B. GaldamezCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API