Laserfiche WebLink
Section 33, Township 118 North, Range 23 West, was platted as CLAIRE ADDITION on <br /> July 19, 1984. <br /> 6. That there is an overlap between the legal descriptions set forth in Finding 2 <br /> above and in Finding 5 above, and that the overlap is 14.14 feet on the east line and <br /> 10.75 on the west line. <br /> 7. That Scott K. Goldsmith and Lynn D.. Schwie were the grantees in a deed dated <br /> December 14, 1987, for Lot 1, Block 1, CLAIRE ADDITION.' <br /> 8. That the land described in the Application is: <br /> That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, <br /> Township 118, Range 23 lying between the North line of the plat of CLAIRE <br /> ADDITION and the South line of the North 643.37 feet of said Northeast Quarter <br /> of the Southwest Quarter, <br /> That part of Lot 1, Block 1, CLAIRE ADDITION, lying Northerly of a line running <br /> from a point on the East line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter <br /> of Section 33, Township 118, Range 23 distant 801.28 feet Southerly from the <br /> Northeast corner of said Southwest Quarter to a point on the West line of said <br /> Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter distant+802.95 feet Southerly from <br /> the Northwest corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter. <br /> 9. That a fence is located between the north line of the lat of CLAIRE ADDITION <br /> and the south line of that part of Lot 1, Block 1, CLAIRE ADDITION described in the <br /> Application, and along a portion of said South line. <br /> 10. That there was some evidence that Applicant's pred cessors in interest mowed <br /> up to the fence, cutting brush to get the mower through tot the fence. <br /> FROM THE FOREGOING THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING: <br /> CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> 1. That the interest of the record owners of that part of Lot 1, Block 1, CLAIRE <br /> ADDITION described in the Application, is superior to the interest of the Applicant based <br /> on the commencement date of the chain of title for the underlying legal description. <br /> 2. Applicant did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that he has acquired <br /> title under the doctrine of adverse possession, to that part of Lot 1, Block 1, CLAIRE <br /> ADDITION described in the Application. <br /> 3. Applicant did not establish by clear, positive and un e uivocal evidence that he <br /> has acquired title under the doctrine of practical location of )oundary, to that part of Lot <br /> 1, Block 1, CLAIRE ADDITION described in the Application. <br /> ORDER <br /> -2- <br /> I <br />