Legal Opinion
Martin v. Van Bergen
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 6, 2012No. B232570PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GILBERT, P. J.
This case arises from a boundary dispute. Defendants rely on the doctrine of boundary by agreement in defense of plaintiffs’ quiet title action. Missing from defendants’ case, among other things, is an essential element—an agreement. We affirm.
*87FACTS
Plaintiffs Keith Martin, Tamara Martin and Adam Vali (collectively Martin) own a 240-acre parcel of land in Paso Robles. The property is improved with a residence and a vineyard. Martin acquired the property in 2005.
Alexandra Van Bergen and Layth Alsudiary (collectively Van Bergen) own a contiguous parcel consisting of a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ernie v. Trinity Lutheran ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
- Contra Costa Water District v. Bar-C PropertiesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Armitage v. DeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Brown v. World ChurchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Bryant v. BlevinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Choi v. Sagemark Consulting, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Citizens for Beach Rights v. City of San Diego, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Area 55 v. Nicholas & TomasevicCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- Area 55 v. Nicholas & Tomasevic CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Choi v. Sagemark ConsultingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.