Legal Opinion

Cameron v. Neal

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 1997No. 23150PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALTERS, Justice.

Walter E. and Lucille M. Cameron (hereinafter the “Camerons”) filed an action to quiet title regarding a disputed boundary line. The real properly in question lies between the surveyed boundary line and a long-existing fence. The Camerons filed the action after a survey in 1990 revealed the true record boundary line between Rose Marie Neal’s property and the Camerons’ property. The Camerons appeal from the summary judgment decision of the district court holding that Neal is the owner of the disputed area under the equitable doctrine of boundary by implied agreement. They also…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Minich v. Gem State Developers, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Riverside Development Co. v. RitchieIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Casey v. Highlands InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Loomis v. City of HaileyIdaho Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Beneficial Life Ins. Co. v. WakamatsuIdaho Supreme Court · 1954

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Baxter v. CraneyIdaho Supreme Court · 2000
  2. P.O. Ventures, Inc. v. Loucks Family Irrevocable TrustIdaho Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Tolley v. Thi Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 2004
  4. L & W SUPPLY CORP. v. Chartrand Family TrustIdaho Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Neider v. ShawIdaho Supreme Court · 2003

27 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