977 N.E.2d 434
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Angel and Kent/Marjorie Powelson dispute ownership of an 80-acre parcel and a 20-foot roadway easement.
- 1964 deed to Angel conveyed 73 acres and an easement for the roadway; 1978/1974 deeds conveyed the remaining 7 acres to Kent and his parents with road easement.
- The Roadway provides access to Angel’s parcels and is used by both parties; Angel later sold portions of her parcel.
- In 2008 the Powelsons conveyed a public utility easement to T-Mobile for a cell tower on their property.
- Angel sued in 2010 for reformation of the 1964 deed and claims of adverse possession, among other counts.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgment for the Powelsons on reformation and adverse possession; Angel appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether designated evidence was properly considered | Angel argues Powelsons’ designated evidence lacking specificity and includes unverified pleadings. | Powelsons contend designated evidence was specific enough and sufficient for summary judgment. | Designated evidence sufficient; waiver but review affirmed. |
| Reformation of deed based on fraud and mistake | Angel asserts mutual mistake and fraud by Nora; seeks reformation. | Powelsons argue laches bars reformation and no fraud proven. | Reformation barred by laches. |
| Adverse possession of the Roadway | Angel claims prescriptive rights to the roadway based on use. | Powelsons argue lack of exclusivity, hostility, and continuity; easement defeats adverse possession. | Adverse possession claims fail; use was under an easement and not exclusive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ling v. Stillwell, 732 N.E.2d 1270 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (designations may be informal if clearly identified)
- Filip v Block, 879 N.E.2d 1076 (Ind. 2008) (TR 56(C) designation specificity required, but can be flexible)
- SMDfund, Inc. v. Fort Wayne-Allen Cnty. Airport Authority, 831 N.E.2d 725 (Ind. 2005) (summary judgment standard; designated evidence sufficiency)
- Williams v. Tharp, 914 N.E.2d 756 (Ind. 2009) (material facts; genuine disputes; standard of review)
- Hutter v. Weiss, 177 N.E.2d 346 (Ind. Ct. App. 1961) (knowledge for laches public nature considerations)
- Mid-States General & Mechanical Contracting Corp. v. Town of Goodland, 811 N.E.2d 425 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (equitable laches—reading instrument; read terms)