Under the boundary by acquiescence doctrine, do Mr. and Mrs. Jackson (“Jacksons”) have the right to establish the permanent boundary line between their property and Glenn Bridges (“Mr. Bridges”) property when (1) disagreeing with Mr. Bridges as to the true location of the boundary line; (2) utilizing the rosebush patch as the permanent boundary line; (3) and maintaining the rosebush patch as the true boundary line for the prescriptive period.
Statement of Facts
Glenn Bridges has contacted our office seeking assistance to quiet title and obtain an ejectment action against the Jacksons from his property located in Broward County, Florida. Mr. Bridges wants to know whether the Jacksons can succeed in the possible defense of …show more content…
At no point was Mr. Bridges uncertain as to the location of the true boundary. Although he placed an electric fence south of the boundary line he did so to “establish a buffer zone” between his puppy and the rosebushes. Baker, 469 So. 2d at 218. The courts have held the act of an owner building a fence within their boundary line does not constitute abandonment or acquiescence of the section of property beyond the structure. Id. at 219. In Baker the Plaintiff constructed new fence ten feet within her property, which kept her dogs at a safe distance from the neighboring property, while the Defendant maintained structures that encroached on the Plaintiff’s land in the area lying outside the fence. In addition, the courts have held a certain boundary line agreed upon by both parties’ due to uncertainty following occupation of one party becomes binding to the landowners and their successors. Shaw, 50 So. 2d at 126 (the Parties did not raise issue or agree to the bamboo hedge as the boundary line, the court found no evidence of boundary by acquiescence). Mr. Bridges did not come to an agreement with Mrs. Miller as to the permanent boundary line prior to or following the encroachment of the