Vezey v. Green
Alaska Supreme Court
35 P.3d 14 (2001)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Angela Green (plaintiff) was given a piece of her family’s land by her grandmother, Billie Harrild, in 1982. Harrild was in declining health and wanted Green to have a home near Harrlid’s home. The piece of the property was on a bluff, across a creek from Harrild’s home. The gift was not recorded, and Harrild and her husband remained the owners of record. Over the following 10 years, Green constructed a house and cultivated the grounds on the bluff. Green generally worked on the property during the summer and worked in California for the rest of the year. Green cleared a number of trees off of the property, created an access road, and posted no-trespassing signs. Green also put up a chain across the road entering the property. In other areas of the property, Green cleared undergrowth, raised chickens, planted a garden, cleared a trail, set up a picnic table and bench, and cut trees. Allen Vezey (defendant) became interested in the property as a potential rock quarry. Vezey checked the title to the property and purchased it from Harrild. Green sued Vezey, asserting title by adverse possession. After a trial, the trial court determined that Green had obtained title to the entire bluff area by adverse possession. Vezey appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fabe, C.J.)
Dissent (Matthews, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.