Does a fence constitute an agreed-to boundary when the actual boundary may be readily ascertained?

Facts: A fence ran between an owner’s property and a neighbor’s property. The owner and the neighbor disputed whether the fence was the boundary line between their properties. The owner filed a quiet title action to establish the true boundary line. Three surveys were ordered to determine the true boundary line. Two of the surveys revealed a portion of the property beyond the fence also belonged to the owner, and not the neighbor. The third survey contained a measuring error, and incorrectly placed the boundary elsewhere.

Claim: The owner sought possession of the disputed portion of property, claiming the fence was not the boundary line since the actual boundary line was readily ascertained by the two accurate surveys.

Counterclaim: The neighbor sought possession of the disputed portion of property, claiming the fence created an agree-to boundary since the surveys conducted to determine the true boundary were in conflict, and thus there was uncertainty regarding the true boundary line.

Holding: A California court of appeals held the fence was not an agreed-to boundary and the owner was entitled to possession of the disputed portion of the property since the actual boundary line was readily ascertained by the two accurately conducted surveys. [Martin v. Van Bergen (2012) 209 CA4th 84]

-ft