Akers v. D.L. White Construction, Inc.
320 P.3d 428
Idaho2014Background
- This is Idaho Supreme Court’s third review of a long easement/trespass dispute involving Akers (plaintiffs) and Whites/Mortensens/White Construction (defendants) across Akers’ parcel.
- Three parcels are involved: Government Lot 2, Parcel A (Whites), and Parcel B (Akers); Millsap Loop Road provides the access nexus; the Whites have a 12.2-foot easement across Government Lot 2 including the triangle, with location disputed.
- After prior appeals, the district court quieted title to the triangle in Akers’ favor and awarded a 12.2-foot easement through Government Lot 2; it did not extend the easement into Parcel B.
- On remand, the district court found a prescriptive easement of 12.2 feet through Parcel B and used Rasor’s map to locate it; this Court vacated on remand for precise location but affirmed the width.
- The district court later denied new evidence on remand while allowing damages, emotional distress, punitive damages, and attorney fees; on appeal the Court affirms the easement location and most damages but remands for apportionment of attorney fees.
- The Court ultimately vacates and remands the attorney-fee award for apportionment under I.C. § 6-202.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Location of prescriptive easement through Parcel B | Akers rely on Rasor map for precise path | Welch Comer map supports a different route | Rasor map’s location upheld |
| Admission of additional evidence on remand | Sinnett/Sherry require considering new evidence to locate easement precisely | District court correctly refused new evidence | Error in standard noted, but no reversible prejudice; evidence cumulative |
| Width of prescriptive easement | Width remains 12.2 feet | Width already established by prior decision | Width not at issue; affirmed 12.2 feet |
| Trebling of damages under I.C. § 6-202 | No Trespassing signs posted; trespass willful; treble damages proper | Question whether trespass was willful or signs adequate | Treble damages upheld; signs valid; trespass willful |
| Attorney fees apportionment under I.C. § 6-202 | Fees should be apportioned to trespass only | No apportionment or broader recovery | Remanded for apportionment of attorney fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Akers I, 142 Idaho 293 127 P.3d 196 (2005) (quieted title to triangle; easement by reservation through Government Lot 2)
- Akers II, 147 Idaho 39 205 P.3d 1175 (2009) (remanded for fact-finding on prescriptive easement location; width affirmed)
- Weitz v. Green, 148 Idaho 851 230 P.3d 743 (2010) (willful, outrageous conduct; basis for punitive/emotional-distress considerations)
- Sinnett v. Werelus, 83 Idaho 514 365 P.2d 952 (1961) (prescriptive easement location; evidentiary rule on remand)
- Capstar Radio Operating Co. v. Lawrence, 153 Idaho 411 283 P.3d 728 (2012) (remand ethics; fresh judge not required for narrow remand issue)
- Bumgarner v. Bumgarner, 124 Idaho 629 862 P.2d 321 (1993) (apportionment of fees under 6-202 context; historical standard)