Opinion ID: 889724
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The Instant Lawsuit

Text: ¶ 14 Based on the deeds and field measurements, Weatherly and his land surveyors completed a survey, ultimately recorded as Certificate of Survey 5900, depicting the exterior boundaries of the Larsens' property ( see Diagram I). The survey showed the northern boundary of the finger of land from Point F to Point E, indicating that the Larsens own the disputed 9.74 acres. The Larsens provided a copy of the survey to the Richardsons in January 2005. By their own admission, the Richardsons believed it to be true and accurate. They did not assert that they owned the area north of the B-to-A fence. Rather, they told the Larsens that they wanted to continue using the corrals and surrounding area for transporting cattle to and from their property. In a letter addressed to the Larsens, the Richardsons stated: All we want is to use the existing corrals 4 or 5 times a year and be able to access our property which would be about 1 1/2 acres. We along with other neighbors have done this for the past several years with no problems. The parties considered a lease or a land swap, but when negotiations reached an impasse, the Larsens recorded Weatherly's survey (COS 5900) and notified the Richardsons that they intended to fence the property along the boundary lines shown on COS 5900. Concerned about liability exposure, the Larsens asked the Richardsons to remove the corrals and holding fences, which were in a dilapidated condition. The Richardsons refused, claiming a prescriptive easement. ¶ 15 The Larsens thus commenced the present action in July 2007. In February 2008, the Richardsons advised the District Court that they believed COS 5900 contained major errors. They requested a four-month extension of discovery so that Milam could examine the property, which could not be done while there was still snow on the ground. The District Court granted this request. Ultimately, Milam issued a report in June 2008 and a supplemental report in September 2009, offering the opinion that the property line of the Richardsons and the Larsens is upon the existing fence line as in existence today (i.e., from Point C to Point B to Point A), meaning that the Richardsons own the disputed 9.74 acres. Milam based this determination on where the fence, the jog, and the road can be found at present. He expressly disregarded all bearings, distances, and language in the deeds indicating that the jog is from Point F to Point E.