Michigan Court of Appeals· 3/1/1993
Kipka v. Fountain
Citations
- 499 N.W.2d 363
- 198 Mich. App. 435
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “If the true property owner regains possession of the land and loses it again, a new cause of action accrues.”
- “To claim by adverse possession, one must show that the property owner of record has had a cause of action for recovery of the land for more than the statutory period.”
- considering the parties’ actual knowledge regarding the disputed property line
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Connor, Brennan, Kelly
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Adams v. AdamsMichigan Court of Appeals· 2007-11-27· cited 198×
- Walters v. SnyderMichigan Court of Appeals· 2000-04-04· cited 81×
- Wengel v. WengelMichigan Court of Appeals· 2006-05-11· cited 60×
- Sackett v. AtyeoMichigan Court of Appeals· 1996-09-13· cited 54×
- Gorte v. Department of TransportationMichigan Court of Appeals· 1993-10-18· cited 50×
- Canjar v. ColeMichigan Court of Appeals· 2009-05-14· cited 32×
- Waisanen v. Superior TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals· 2014-06-24· cited 27×
- Mason v. City of MenomineeMichigan Court of Appeals· 2009-02-26· cited 23×
- Beach v. Lima TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals· 2009-04-21· cited 21×
- Pine Bluffs Area Property Owners Ass'n v. DeWitt Landing & Dock Ass'nMichigan Court of Appeals· 2010-04-01· cited 4×
- Denise Houston v. Mint Group LLCMichigan Court of Appeals· 2021-01-28
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.