Rippey v. Harrison
Citations
- 66 Wash. 109
- 119 P. 178
- 1911 Wash. LEXIS 1021
Syllabus
<p>Boundabies — Evidence to Establish — Sufficiency—Advebse Possession — Estoppel. Upon a dispute as to the true location of a line between two lots, plaintiffs failed to sustain the burden of proof and are estopped to assert title to a strip 2.44 feet wide outside of their fence, where it appears that they built a fence upon what they supposed was the true line and maintained the same and made no claim to the additional strip for thirteen years, and defendants bought the adjoining lot supposing the fence to be on the line and held possession for more than ten years; there also being evidence on the part of defendants that the fence was set on the line marked by the original stakes, and was pointed out as the line by the common grantor (Pabkee, J., dissenting in part).</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- allowing photographs showing 7 “a ‘fracture or break in the spine’” and “an ear-to-ear skull fracture”
- “voluntary intoxication is not a defense to a specific-intent crime.” (internal quotation mark omitted) (alteration in original) (quoting Hale v. State, 191 So. 3d 719, 724 (Miss. 2016))
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Dunbar, Parker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.