WOLF v. THOMPSON, 194 Kan. 145 (1965)

398 P.2d 565

EVERETT L. WOLF and ALPHA N. WOLF, His Wife, Appellants, v. ART THOMPSON and BERA G. THOMPSON, His Wife, Appellees.

No. 43,798Supreme Court of Kansas
Opinion filed January 23, 1965.

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

BOUNDARIES — Determining Fence as Line — No Reversible Error.
In an action wherein the trial court determined a boundary dispute between two adjacent landowners, the record on appeal is carefully examined, and it is held, plaintiffs have failed to make it affirmatively appear the trial court committed reversible error with respect to any of the particulars complained of.

Appeal from Butler district court; GEORGE S. REYNOLDS, judge. Opinion filed January 23, 1965. Judgment affirmed.

Walter F. McGinnis, of El Dorado, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellants.

L.J. Bond, of El Dorado, argued the cause, and Robert M. Bond, of El Dorado, was with him on the brief for the appellees.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

ROBB, J.:

This appeal is from the judgment, order, and decision of the trial court and from the order overruling plaintiffs’ motion for new trial.

On August 15, 1957, plaintiffs purchased lot 27, block 29, in the original town addition to the town of Latham, Kansas. Previously in May, 1955, defendants had acquired lots 28 and 29 of the same block which lots were south of and adjacent to plaintiffs’ property. The trial court in a memorandum opinion found from competent, substantial evidence that a fence had been constructed between the properties more than fifty years ago and had been recognized thereafter as the boundary line. In the formal journal entry of judgment the trial court found generally in favor of defendants and that defendants were not occupying any property belonging to plaintiffs. Judgment was entered accordingly. Hence this appeal.

We have carefully examined the record in this case and there is only one conclusion that can be made from thereon. Plaintiffs have failed to make it affirmatively appear that the trial court committed reversible error with respect to any of the particulars complained of and for this reason we are compelled to hold the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed in all respects.

Judgment affirmed.

Page 146