Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

526 S.W.2d 39

Albert v. DeClue

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided June 17, 1975

Missouri Court of Appeals · decided 1975-06-17

Relies on Fields v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1975-06-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2017

7 state decisions

5019751980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

*40 STEWART, Judge.

¶1 Defendants appeal from the judgment in this court tried case in which the court quieted title to a triangular piece of land in plaintiff and further found that defendants had not carried the burden of proving that they had obtained title to that land by adverse possession.

¶2 Plaintiff is the record owner of a 40 acre tract of land in Washington County which adjoins a 40 acre tract owned by defendants. Defendants’ property lies to the south of that of plaintiff. Defendants sought to establish title to a triangular tract to the north of the common record boundary line of the parties. 1 The portion of plaintiff’s property claimed by defendants was fenced with barbed wire primarily set in trees. While fencing is one of the strongest indications of adverse possession the primary issue here was whether the defendants had held adversely for the necessary prescriptive time. The evidence on this point was conflicting, we must therefore give great deference to the finding of the trial court who was in better position to judge the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence. Marshall v. Marshall, 484 S.W.2d 208 (Mo.1972). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the findings and conclusions of the trial court are not clearly erroneous; no errors of law appear. A full opinion would have no precedential value we thus affirm in accord with Rule 84.16(b), Y.A.M.R.

CLEMENS, P. J. and KELLY, J., concur.
1

¶3 . It would serve no useful purpose to recite the lengthy legal description in this opinion.

/526/sw2d/39 · .json · Public domain