Sydow v. Douglass Properties

Thanks for that one. I started reading, but I'll have to finish it when I have more time. How long is the time in Washington to prove up AP?

Good the Sydow's prevailed.  The opposition is well known in this area to be a development bully and does what he wants!

I note that this is a slip opinion. Ordinarily this would be:

 An initial, preliminary version of a court's written decision. It is released to the public shortly after the ruling is made but has not yet undergone final editing, formatting, or pagination for formal inclusion in bound legal volumes.

I read the opinion and find it to be an ordinary statement of Washington's law concerning adverse possession and estoppel. I am only surprised  that the trial court came up with something different. That trial court opinion might be more interesting to read.

Posted by: @mightymoe

↑

How long is the time in Washington to prove up AP?

It can vary depending on circumstances, but in most cases the number is 10 years.

Posted by: @pls8xx

↑

I ..... find it to be an ordinary statement of Washington's law concerning adverse possession

Quite so. There is nothing groundbreaking about this ruling. I posted it because it has such a detailed discussion of just what the law is. 

As you say, slip opinions are subject to amendment. Commonly for spelling, grammar, punctuation, and no more. 

Our state just threw a bomb into AP. You can only claim it now if you've paid the taxes on the land. If the defendant has paid the taxes there is not AP. And they have to have failed to pay for 10 years, however those ten years don't need to be consecutive. Good luck getting AP from here on out. I don't know if AP claims predating this statute will still work, I'm guessing any older claim will still hold, I haven't chatted with an attorney about it yet. 

I agree. This is an excellent case for surveyors to study. If surveyors (or attorneys) understood every word of the opinion they would have had the knowledge to guide the trial court to a proper decision avoiding the need for an appeal, or probably avoided a trial of any kind.

Where I practiced, surveyors were rugged individualists that seldom talked to other surveyors about the court cases they had. Thus surveying associations seldom knew of boundary cases in time to aid good law. It's the badly handled cases that produce bad law.  

I was not impressed with the cartoon that was supposed to be an officially recorded document.  It looked more like something sketched on a napkin over lunch. Everything vital to defining either tract by deed and/or what is the exact description of the debated parcel is missing.

Posted by: @mightymoe

↑

Our state just threw a bomb into AP. You can only claim it now if you've paid the taxes on the land. If the defendant has paid the taxes

It's been that way in CA for my entire career, so I've never seen a successful AP claim.

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

I was not impressed with the cartoon that was supposed to be an officially recorded document. 

Cranky pants. If you are referring to the exhibit map on page 8, that is not a survey. It's an exhibit. 

@jim-frame 

I'm all on board with it, some of the recent AP decisions were shocking. Not that the courts were incorrect, but the AP here was very easy to obtain. 

@norman-oklahoma 

They refer to it as being the survey proving there is nonconformance with the deeds.  We can't see where the intended line should be as they do not provide the wording of the deeds.

Posted by: @holy-cow

↑

They refer to it as being the survey

There are several references to a survey having been performed and filed, but I find no statement that the exhibit on page 8 is said survey.   

Most all boundaries have two locations, one based on the sum of all records and the other based on the actions or inactions of the adjoining landowners. By boundaries I mean the geographical limits of ownership rights. It's nice when both locations are in the same spot, but don't expect it.

A surveyor has no authority over land rights. A survey serves two purposes. It memorializes facts found and renders an opinion on the location of boundaries.

When educated, my clients always wanted to know my opinion on what they owned, not what their deed said.

In this case it could be said that the appeal court found for a boundary based on the action of the parties on less facts than desirable. Keep in mind that the appeal court is limited to that found in a transcript of the trial court. We know the trial court got it wrong and it's reasonable that was a result of the trial lawyer's failure to present a clear understanding of the facts. 

Through the years I have learned that surveyors do not always set bars where their survey shows they did.  Maybe two feet, maybe 150 feet.  The 150 feet error was in setting a center of section.  The bar was set where the references said it would be.  Following the survey drawing put it out to the northwest the roughly 150 feet.  The problem was they were finding the corners of a much smaller aliquot part of the NW quarter.  My job was to create a tract adjoining the named aliquot part.  OOPS!

Posted by: @pls8xx

↑

We know the trial court got it wrong and it's reasonable that was a result of the trial lawyer's failure to present a clear understanding of the facts. 

So you think Sydow had a different lawyer for the appeal and this new lawyer was better able to "present a clear understanding of the facts"?

If it was the same lawyer for Sydow and the appeals court only had the transcripts to rely on from the original trial, then the original court looks like a clown for getting every aspect of its judgement overturned.

Posted by: @lurker

↑

Posted by: @pls8xx

↑

We know the trial court got it wrong and it's reasonable that was a result of the trial lawyer's failure to present a clear understanding of the facts. 

So you think Sydow had a different lawyer for the appeal and this new lawyer was better able to "present a clear understanding of the facts"?

If it was the same lawyer for Sydow and the appeals court only had the transcripts to rely on from the original trial, then the original court looks like a clown for getting every aspect of its judgement overturned.

I have no reason to believe different lawyers where involved in the appeal. Lawyers do not provide additional evidence at the appeal and the appeal court is limited to the evidence of the trial transcript. Did the trial court look like a clown? Maybe, but I've seen so many cases where lawyers presented such confusing evidence that I find it hard to blame the judge. Lawyers have little monetary interest in studying boundary law. Judges are lawyers in a robe. Land Surveyors make a living from boundary work. It's a shame surveyors don't have a better understanding of law.  

Posted by: @mightymoe

↑

Our state just threw a bomb into AP. You can only claim it now if you've paid the taxes on the land. If the defendant has paid the taxes there is not AP. And they have to have failed to pay for 10 years, however those ten years don't need to be consecutive. Good luck getting AP from here on out. I don't know if AP claims predating this statute will still work, I'm guessing any older claim will still hold, I haven't chatted with an attorney about it yet. 

Arkansas also requires payment of taxes for AP, but not necessarily on the land being claimed. 

How can you pay taxes on an area of AP unless you are paying them on the entirety of the current description, of which, the AP area is a graphical portion, thereof?

Side note:  I can see how some large tracts may have been subject to adverse possession in their entirety.  In the early days of settlement, a person could become the owner of a tract that turns out to be not what they thought it would be.  People simply moved away.  Someone else could claim it as their own, pay the taxes, if any were assessed,  They would have had to use the AP laws to show legal ownership for later conveyance to others.  There would have been almost no way in those days to track down the actual owners.