Rowe v. Klein
Washington Court of Appeals
409 P.3d 1152 (2018)
In 2008, Jeffrey and Rebecca Rowe (collectively, Rowe) (plaintiffs) purchased lot four from Trent and Melissa Adams (collectively, Adams) (defendants). Adams conveyed a statutory warranty deed to Rowe, which included the warranties of seisin, of the right to convey, of quiet enjoyment, against encumbrances, and to defend grantee’s title. Joel Klein (defendant) owned adjacent lot three. At the time of Rowe’s purchase, Klein’s greenhouse extended over the property line between lots three and four. Also, Klein had a parking strip adjacent to lot four, and vehicles parked on the strip often encroached onto lot four. Klein also maintained the lawn and a leach field on lot four in the area closest to his property line. In 2010, Rowe had their lot surveyed, which showed that Klein’s greenhouse and vehicles encroached onto lot four. When Rowe sought to terrace the boundary between the lots, Klein objected, asserting that he maintained the northern 10 feet of lot four as his own since 1974. In 2014, Rowe filed a quiet-title and ejectment action against Klein. Klein filed an adverse-possession counterclaim. The trial court found that Klein had a valid adverse-possession claim and quieted title to the disputed area in Klein. Rowe sought to invoke the warranty to defend from Adams. After Adams failed to respond, Rowe filed a third-party complaint against Adams, claiming that Adams breached the warranties of seisin, against encumbrances, of quiet possession, and to defend. Rowe filed the complaint against Adams six years and three months after Rowe purchased lot four. Adams moved to dismiss Rowe’s complaint as time barred. The trial court denied the motion. Adams appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Spearman, 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 707,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead 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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.