Frank and Gayle Marek owned property adjacent to property owned ...

[Mr. Wonderful]

Frank and Gayle Marek owned property adjacent to property owned by Earl and Sandra Lawrence. The two couples disputed where the boundary lines between their two properties were located. Both couples had title to their property described through deeds that used the government survey in their description portions. The dividing line between their properties in both deeds was described as the section line dividing Sections 26 and 27. However, the two couples disagreed as to where that line actually was because most people assumed that Three Bear Road was the dividing line, and Three Bear Road did not run along the section line. The court relied on testimony about the assumed boundary line to establish the correct dividing line between the Mareks and Lawrence properties. Was the court correct to do so? Explain why or why not.

Question 2

Ann was seriously ill and feared that she might lapse into a coma or somehow become unable to speak or act for herself in her medical emergency. She is aware that agents ordinarily lose their authority to act for principals who become mentally disabled. She nevertheless desires to have her husband Alberto make medical decisions and speak on her behalf. She is particularly concerned about existing on life support in a persistent and incurable vegetative state. Is there any action that she might take to enable Alberto to act for her?

[cuttiesgirl16]

Answer to Question 1

The court held that a government survey description was full and complete and the boundary line was clearly described as the section line. To allow speculation and view points to change that boundary line was not permissible. A complete and accurate deed description conveys the title given and cannot be changed by parol evidence. Marek v. Lawrence, 278 P.3d 920 (Idaho 2012).

Answer to Question 2

If the state in which Ann resides has adopted the Uniform Durable Power of Attorney Act, she can designate Alberto in writing as the agent whose authority shall not be affected by the subsequent disability or incapacity of the principal. Alberto then would be authorized to act on her behalf.