Another boundary dispute settled by court

As was noted in our discussion of a January Iowa Court of Appeals opinion, boundary disputes sometimes arise in rural settings and it is possible that a survey will not settle the dispute. Instead, it is often the case that usage of the property at issue determines the actual property boundary. Another Iowa case points this rule out.

In 1970, a farm family deeded a tract of land to another party north of a road. From 1970 to 2000, the road was viewed by the parties as the boundary between the two tracts. In 2000, the land north of the road was sold to the plaintiff, who also believed that the road served as the southern boundary and farmed it accordingly. In 2001, the family that had owned the land south of the road had their property surveyed in preparation of selling it. The survey showed that the family had actually retained title to some land north of the road. The land was subsequently sold, and the buyer (the defendant in the case) demanded rent from the plaintiff for farming the buyer's ground. The plaintiff paid the rent in an attempt to try to get along with the defendant. The plaintiff subsequently rented the land they farmed to another party and the defendant demanded rent from that party. After about three cropping seasons, the plaintiff's patience wore thin and the plaintiff filed a quiet title action against the defendant claiming that the road had become the true boundary between the properties and that the survey and deed to the defendant was of no effect as to the property north of the road.

The trial court agreed with the plaintiff and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Under Iowa law, if a boundary has been acquiesced to via usage for at least 10 years, the usage establishes the boundary even though a subsequent survey shows otherwise. Here, the plaintiff was able to demonstrate that the adjoining landowners had always treated the road as the southern boundary, and had clearly done so for at least 10 years. That time requirement had been passed well before the defendant acquired the land. Thus, the defendant's actions concerning assertion of ownership after the survey had been conducted and the sale completed were of no effect. Feldmann v. Ostwinkle, No. 05-1157, 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 196 (Iowa Ct. App. Mar. 1, 2006).