Wasmund v. Harm

Citations

• 36 Wash. 170
• 78 P. 777
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 538

Syllabus

<p>Adverse Possession — Easements—Right of Way — Prescriptive Period Follows Statute. An easement of a right of way across the lands of another, in favor of an adjoining owner, may be acquired by adverse user for the period of limitations for quieting title to lands.</p> <p>Same — Pleadings—Answer—Variance—Amendments. In an action to enjoin trespass, an answer setting up a right of way by prescription, by adverse user for twenty years, does not limit the proof to user for twenty years, since the easement by prescription may be acquired by ten years’ adverse use, and no amendment of the pleadings is called for.</p> <p>Same — Use of Way When Adverse — Evidence—Sufficiency. Upon an issue as to whether the use of a right of way across the adjoining farm lands of another was adverse or merely permissive, the trial court’s finding of adverse use is sustained by evidence to the effect that the users found the way open when they purchased their lands, that it was the sole means of access thereto, that, after some years, the lands subject to the use, which had been uninclosed, were fenced by the owner, who requested the users to erect gates, which was done, although there is conflict in the testimony as to the gates, the owner claiming that he required the users to erect gates or submit to the closing of the road.</p> <p>Same — Intent How Shown. In such a case the fact that the users of the road did not, in giving their testimony, positively declare that their use was adverse, does not affect the weight of the evidence, since their intent can he better shown by acts than by declarations.</p>