09-18-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STL'ART E. GALE LAW OFFICE VailcT Office Park Suite 210 10800 Lyndaic Avenue South Bloomington. Minnesota S5420 STL’ART c. GALE s vakkes gale STEVEN M GALE July 27. 1995 Phone; (612) 8UO920 Fkjc Noi (612) 8M-92)t rrMr. Roger Reed Reed Sc Pond ltd. 5424 Shoreline Drive * ' — P O Bo.x 9 Mound, MN 55364-0009 Dear Mr. Reed: Your letter of July 20th. 1995 addressed to Tim Feyo and Karen Fuller-Feyo has been delivered to me for response. As I interpret your letter, and based upon the intormation furnished to me by the Feyos, your client is now making some unsubstantiated claim of title by adverse possession to 15 feet by 180 feet of my client’s property. As I understand it, all agree that the survey that my clients have of the premises is now correct. I have discussed the moveable tin shed that your client has constructed, which encroaches a few feet into my client's property, and which constitutes an ongoing trespass, although only for the past few years. At this point in time, we politely ask that the same be removed within ten (10) days. I say that, because my clients have presently lost a sale of the property, because ot your client s encroachment, and continuing trespass upon my client’s property.. That fact subjects your client to a claim of substantial damages because of the loss of this sale I have also discussed thoroughly with my clients any claim of user by your client. My clients have owned their land for a long time, and are well acquainted with any use of their land. It is clear to me that essential elements, which must be present, if one is to attempt to claim another's property by adverse possession, are lacking in this case. The tin shed for example occupies less tha.'. one percent of the total area you claim to have occupied openly, notoriously, and adversely to the ownership of the Feyo’s.