Marshall v. Soffer
Appellate Court of Connecticut
756 A.2d 284 (2000)
- Written by Ron Leshnower, JD
Facts
Patrick Marshall and Deborah Marshall (plaintiffs) owned land in Branford, Connecticut. The Marshalls sought to determine the boundary between their property and neighboring property owned by Joseph Soffer (defendant). The Marshalls sued to quiet title to the land based on the actual boundary line. Soffer claimed that, regardless of the boundary determination, he had acquired title to the disputed land by adverse possession. Soffer also argued the Marshalls’ deed was ambiguous, because a monument in the description had been lost. In addition, Soffer presented a 1967 map that had been created for Soffer, indicating that the property lines shown were as agreed to by Soffer and Huzar, who owned the property before the Marshalls. However, this map was not referenced in any deed. Finally, Soffer asserted that the doctrine of acquiescence in a boundary applied and was satisfied by Huzar. The trial court found that the Marshalls’ deed was not ambiguous, a 1967 map did not modify the deed’s description, and Soffer failed to prove adverse possession. The trial court ordered Soffer to remove a fence and other material in accordance with the deed’s description. Soffer appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dupont, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 780,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
