Legal Opinion

Mehdizadeh v. Mincer

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 27, 1996No. B081681PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KITCHING, Acting P. J.

Introduction

Real property law distinguishes between the different concepts of adverse possession and prescriptive easement. It is more difficult to prove adverse possession, and with good reason; a claimant relying on adverse possession seeks fee title to disputed property. A prescriptive easement, by contrast, simply allows a claimant the restricted use of property owned by another.

This appeal involves a dispute between neighbors which followed their discovery that a fence built many years earlier was not located on the legal boundary between their properties.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. City of Pasadena v. California-Michigan Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Golden West Baseball Co. v. City of AnaheimCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  3. Wright v. BestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Ernie v. Trinity Lutheran ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Hirshfield v. SchwartzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  2. Blackmore v. PowellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. Harrison v. WelchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  4. Main Street Plaza v. Cartwright & Main, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. Hansen v. Sandridge Partners, L.P., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018

16 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