Powell v. Schultz
Court of Appeals of Washington
4 Wash. App. 213 (1971)
In 1910, the southern half of the subject property was sold to Erickstad. The deed defined the dividing line as “the Creek running through said Lot.” However, there were two creeks running through the lot: North Creek and South Creek. A dispute arose between Schultz (defendant), the current owner of the southern half, and Powell (plaintiff), the current owner of the northern half. Schultz argued that at the time of the deed, North Creek was the only creek in existence and that a subsequent avulsion caused the creek to become split. Powell argued that the avulsion occurred before 1910. The trial court determined South Creek to be the boundary as it would give each party closer to half the lot than would a North Creek boundary.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Pearson, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.