Heiser v. Dahl

Summary

The court reversed the judgment quieting title to the entire disputed tract in favor of the Heisers and remanded for additional findings identifying the extent of any adverse possession. The court held that the evidence supported adverse possession of some areas containing structures and equipment, but did not establish adverse possession of the entire tract, particularly where prior use was permissive or consisted only of ordinary maintenance. The court also held that the parties had not mutually acquiesced in County Road 34 as the boundary because their testimony showed they understood the section line to be the true boundary.