In the late spring or summer of 1970, Dan Jutting's father ...

[2125004343]

In the late spring or summer of 1970, Dan Jutting's father planted grass on his lot, including a ten-foot strip bordering the adjoining property belonging to Jack and Georgine Hendrix, and kept it watered as it grew. During that summer, he also planted two trees on the strip of property near the boundary. These trees are now fully grown. Jutting's father also constructed a clothesline on the property that ran from the west to the east. The west support for the clothesline was also located on the strip. Later, a swing was hung from that support and used by the Jutting children and grandchildren. Behind the west support, Jutting's father planted lilac bushes. From the summer of 1970 until 1998, the Jutting family has continuously watered and mowed the grass on the disputed strip and raked it when necessary. Jutting's father died in the early 1990s, and Jutting's mother remained in the home until 1997, when she sold it to Jutting. Before Jutting purchased the property, a surveyor was hired to do a location survey for the title insurance company. The survey showed that the west boundary of the property was where it was presumed to be, that is, approximately 10 feet from the west side of the Jutting residence. The Hendrix residence has had a number of different owners since its construction in the late 1960s. The Hendrixes purchased the property in late 1997. Through subsequent discussions with Jutting, Mr. Hendrix learned there was uncertainty over the exact location of the line between their two properties. In the summer of 1998, he hired a surveyor to do a complete survey to determine the boundaries. The surveyor discovered a ten-foot error in the original platting of the subdivision that slid the boundaries of the Hendrix and Jutting properties ten feet to the east. This pushed the east line of the Hendrix property to within an inch of the west side of Jutting's residence. Although Jutting was made aware of the true property line, he persisted in trying to maintain the disputed strip of property. Harsh words were eventually exchanged between Jutting and Mr. Hendrix, and Hendrix began to construct a split rail fence along the property line within an inch or so of Jutting's residence. Jutting sued the Hendrixes for an injunction to prevent construction of the fence and to quiet title to the disputed strip of property. Jutting also raised claims for trespass and property damage and claimed adverse possession of the disputed strip. Who owns the strip?

Question 2

The GOOMBYs (Get Out of My Back Yard) in Rio Linda have brought suit to have a power plant removed from an area located just behind their back yards. The owners of the plant want to know what right they have? Where would they look to determine their rights?
 A) Eminent domain protections in the federal constitution
 B) Eminent domain protections in their state constitution
 C) Case law on constitutional issues
 D) All of the above
 E)None of the above

[mcni194]

Answer to Question 1

The South Dakota Supreme Court held that the actions of plaintiff and his parents in maintaining the lawn and two trees on the disputed strip of property were sufficient to constitute adverse possession of property. Jutting v. Hendrix, 606 N.W.2d 140 (S.D. 2000).

Answer to Question 2

D

[2125004343]

TYSM

[jamesnevil303]

Excellent