Legal Opinion

Bahr v. Imus

Utah Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 2011No. 20090646PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Justice LEE,

opinion of the Court:

T1 Rob and Sherri Bahr and Ione Senn (the "Bahrs") filed this suit to challenge the location of the boundary between their residential property and that of their neighbors, Jim and Melodee Imus. The district court entered summary judgment in favor of the Imuses, concluding that the Bahrs were precluded from challenging the boundary established by a fence on the property under the doctrine of boundary by estoppel. The court of appeals affirmed.

12 We agree that the Imuses are entitled to summary judgment, but base our decision on a ground (boundary by agreement)…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
  2. State v. PenaUtah Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Bonham v. MorganUtah Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Holmes Development, LLC v. CookUtah Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Tripp v. BagleyUtah Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Graves v. North Eastern Services, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Salo v. TylerUtah Supreme Court · 2018
  3. Gables at Sterling Vill. Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Castlewood-Sterling Vill. I, LLCUtah Supreme Court · 2018
  4. Hill v. Superior Property Management Services, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. HorneUtah Supreme Court · 2012

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

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

Powered by the Exa API