Egli v. Troy
602 N.W.2d 329 · Supreme Court of Iowa · 1999
Facts
The Eglis discovered the Troys building a house on land the Eglis believed was theirs, and claimed the Ransons were also asserting dominion over some of their land. The Eglis asserted ownership based on a fence line that they and their predecessors had treated as the boundary for over ten years, and to which the Troys, Ransons, and their predecessors had acquiesced. The Ransons had purchased their property from Rosemary Greve in 1988, receiving a special warranty deed for her interest. The house was being built in "disputed area 1," one of two triangular parcels on the east side of the fence line.
Procedural history
The Eglis brought an action to establish ownership by acquiescence. The Troys and Ransons brought a third-party petition against their seller, Rosemary Greve, asserting breach of a special warranty deed. The district court, Judge Robert J. Curnan, entered summary judgment against the Troys and Ransons on their third-party claim against Mrs. Greve. Later, the district court, Judge Lawrence H. Fautsch, ruled in favor of the Eglis on their acquiescence claim. This court affirmed the acquiescence ruling but reversed the summary judgment in favor of the third-party defendant and remanded for further proceedings.
Issue
1. Does a special warranty deed, warranting against claims by persons claiming "by, through or under" the grantor, cover claims arising from the grantor's alleged acquiescence in an established boundary line? 2. Was there substantial evidence to support the district court's finding that the fence line was established as the boundary by acquiescence?
Holding
1. Yes, the special warranty deed warranted against claims arising through acquiescence by the grantors, and the summary judgment for Greve was reversed. 2. Yes, the district court's finding that the fence line was established by acquiescence was affirmed.
Rule
A special warranty deed warrants against claims arising through the grantor's acquiescence in an established boundary, as well as any affirmative acts by them, because such claims are considered to be "by, through or under" the grantor. Acquiescence is the mutual recognition by two adjoining landowners for ten years or more that a line, definitely marked by a fence or in some manner, is the dividing line between them. This means both parties acknowledge and treat the line as the boundary, and when it persists for ten years, the line becomes the true boundary. Acquiescence may be inferred by the silence or inaction of one party who knows of the boundary line claimed by the other and fails to dispute it for a ten-year period, and must be proven by clear evidence.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.