Rogers Brothers Coal Co. v. Roberts

• Decision Date: 26 October 1926
• Citation: 216 Ky. 214
• Parties: Rogers Brothers Coal Company, et al. v. Roberts, et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

216 Ky. 214

Rogers Brothers Coal Company, et al. v. Roberts, et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Decided October 26, 1926.

1. Boundaries. — Evidence held to sustain judgment determining location of boundary as described in deed.

2. Boundaries. — Object of rules for establishment of boundaries is to ascertain actual location of boundary as made at the time.

3. Boundaries. — Actual location of line by parties, when clearly shown and long acquiesced in, must prevail; adverse possession thereunder giving title to land.

Appeal from Pike Circuit Court.

J.J. MOORE and MOORE & CHILDERS, for appellants.

PICKELSIMER & STEELE for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY COMMISSIONER HOBSON.

Affirming.

In the excellent brief for appellants the question to be decided on this appeal is thus stated by counsel:

"The only issue presented by this record is whether the deed from Harvey G. Robinson and others to Elisha Branham of date February 8, 1873, covers the property in controversy or any part thereof claimed by appellees. If it does the judgment should be reversed. If not, it should be affirmed."

The deed in question is a conveyance of a tract of thirty-five acres of land, more or less, lying on the west side of Caney creek in Pike county, and described as follows:

"Beginning at a water oak on the dividing line between said Elisha Branham and William Kinney; thence running up the hill on west side of a straight line to the top of the ridge between said Caney creek and the Daniel Roberts branch; thence running up the ridge to the dividing line between said Elisha Branham and David Branham; thence running down the hill with the line thereof to a planted stone at or near said Caney creek; thence running down said creek with the meanders of said creek to opposite the beginning."

Appellees prove by four or five witnesses that a water oak standing on the side of the road had been for many years recognized as the beginning corner of the deed; that many years ago a fence was built along the line running from this point up to the ridge or nearly up to it, and was recognized as the line between the parties; that the owner on each side cleared and cultivated the land on his side of the fence and both recognized the line indicated by the fence running out from the water oak as the line between them for much more than twenty years, and there was no controversy on the subject until this suit was brought.

On the other hand, appellants locate the corner about 600 feet...