Legal Opinion

Kiely v. Graves

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 2012No. 84828-9PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, C. J.

¶1 At issue in this review is whether homeowners William Kiely and Sally Chapin-Kiely may *928claim adverse possession of an alley dedicated for public use. Relying on Erickson Bushling, Inc. v. Manke Lumber Co., 77 Wn. App. 495, 891 P.2d 750 (1995), the trial court ruled that the Kielys established their adverse possession claim to the underlying fee interest held by their neighbors, Kenneth and Karen Graves, in an alley vacated by the city of Port Townsend. We hold that the city held an interest in the alley for use as a public thoroughfare and that RCW 7.28.090 precluded adverse possession of…

2Cases cited51 opinions

  1. Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District v. DickieWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Lake v. Woodcreek Homeowners Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Finch v. MatthewsWashington Supreme Court · 1968
  4. State v. LundquistWashington Supreme Court · 1962
  5. State Ex. Rel. York v. B. of C. Com'rsWashington Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Newport Yacht Basin Ass'n of Condominium Owners v. Supreme Northwest, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2012
  2. Bryan Kelley And Dorre Don Llc v. Beverly L. TondaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  3. Stuart Mccoll v. Geoffrey AndersonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
  4. Franks v. State (In re M.-A.F.-S.)Court of Appeals of Washington · 2018
  5. Admasu v. Port of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014

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