ROCKY LANE WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (12 total)

• Harris v. Soules, 416 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
  …al court properly found that appellant failed to adduce competent evidence of a boundary dispute or uncertainty by the parties or their predecessors which was resolved by establishing a boundary through agreement or acquiescence. See King v. Carden, 237 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). The order granting judgment notwithstanding the jury’s verdict is AFFIRMED. ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and ERVIN and SHAW, JJ., concur.…
• Nettie McDONALD v. Ossie Howard Givens and Doris Linnell Givens, 509 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
  …(1) a dispute from which it can be implied that both parties are in doubt as to the boundary, and (2) continued occupation and acquiescence in a line other than the true boundary for a period of more than the statute of limitations. King v. Carden, 237 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). In Shaw v. Williams, 50 So. 2d 125 (Fla.1950), the court held that a boundary by acquiescence could be established by either a dispute or uncertainty as to the location of the true boundary. Uncertainty means actual lack of know…
• Kerrigan v. Thomas, 281 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
  …sitates resort to mere conjecture.” (Emphasis supplied.) Also see, F.S., Sec. 95.13, F.S.A. Appellants are further correct in enumerating the three essential elements to establish boundary by agreement as set forth by this Court in King v. Carden, 237 So. 2d 26 (Fla.App.1970), namely: uncertainty or dispute as to the true boundary, an agreement between the parties as to a certain line, and subsequent occupation accordingly by the parties, sufficient in time to show a settled recognition of the agreed line…

Authorities Cited

• Echols v. State, 201 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)