Harding v. Allen

HENRIOD, Justice.

Appeal from a judgment for defendant in a boundary line case. Affirmed with costs to defendant.

Nub of this case is whether the court, as fact arbiter 1 erred in concluding that one of the courses of contiguous tracts had been established under the so-called doctrine of “boundary by acquiescence.”

In reviewing under recognized rules 2 we can say that defendant in 1937 owned and still owns a house and lot adjoining plaintiff’s present commercial property consisting of two contiguous tracts purchased in 1951 from two different predecessors. The tracts were called the Weller and…