Todd H. Maddock & a. v. Michael J. Higgins

Summary

The court affirmed that the disputed monuments did not establish the boundary, that the plaintiffs failed to prove ownership of the wild portion of the disputed area by adverse possession or boundary by acquiescence, and that the trial court properly assessed witness credibility and dismissed the trespass claim. It affirmed a prescriptive easement for limited snow removal but reversed the adverse-possession ruling concerning the portions of the driveway and parking area extending onto the defendant’s property because the evidence established exclusive use for more than twenty years. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with that ruling.