King v. Fronk
Utah Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
HENRIOD, Chief Justice.
Appeal from an action tried to the court in which plaintiffs sought title, by way of boundary by acquiescence, to a S' 7" strip of land. The trial court concluded that the proof did not justify such claim, but that an easement had been established from the street line extending one-half the distance of the disputed area. Reversed, with no costs awarded.
Neither side pleaded or attempted to prove an easement. It was all or nothing for both. We agree not only that an ease*137ment should not have been awarded under such circumstances, but that the evidence did not show any…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Holmes v. JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1906
- Brown v. MillinerUtah Supreme Court · 1951
- Home Owners' Loan Corporation v. DudleyUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Willie v. Local Realty Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1946
- Hummel v. YoungUtah Supreme Court · 1953
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Halladay v. CluffUtah Supreme Court · 1984
- Ollinger v. BennettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- Fuoco v. WilliamsUtah Supreme Court · 1966
- Hales v. FrakesUtah Supreme Court · 1979
- Trappett v. DavisIdaho Supreme Court · 1981
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.