Davis Estates, L.L.C. v. Junge
2013 Mo. App. LEXIS 193
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Davis Estates purchased land Dec 31, 2003 and shared a northern boundary with the Junges; boundary dispute and claimed adverse possession were anticipated but no survey was ordered at closing.
- Davis Estates sued in 2004 seeking ejectment, quiet title, and damages; Junges counterclaimed for adverse possession.
- A bench trial was held June 20–21, 2011; prior owner Price testified about long-standing improvements in the disputed area.
- Lambeth’s 2010 survey described Tract A (Junge tract), Tract B (entire disputed area) and Tract C (smaller tract within B, including driveway and irrigation); Exhibit 4 is a legal description of part of Tract C.
- Davis Estates challenged Exhibit 4 as outside pleadings; the trial court admitted it, and the court ultimately awarded Tract C to the Junges.
- The trial court’s judgment was affirmed on appeal, with Davis Estates appealing the sufficiency of evidence for possession elements and the admissibility of Exhibit 4.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was substantial evidence of actual possession | Davis Estates argues Junges failed to prove actual possession | Junges contends they did possess Tract C through mowing, tree planting, and maintenance | Yes; substantial evidence supported actual possession |
| Whether there was substantial evidence of exclusive possession | Davis Estates contends possession was not exclusive | Junges maintained the area as a yard and exclusive control can be inferred | Yes; exclusive possession supported by maintenance and yard-like use |
| Whether Exhibit 4 was admissible despite pleading scope | Exhibit 4 fell outside the pleadings and should be excluded | Exhibit 4 was within scope or amendable under Rule 55.38(b) and no prejudice shown | Yes; court did not abuse discretion; Exhibit 4 admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Snow v. Ingenthron, 285 S.W.3d 415 (Mo.App.2009) (standard of review for substantial evidence)
- Harness v. Wallace, 167 S.W.3d 288 (Mo.App.2005) (burden on appellant to show error in judgment)
- Watson v. Moore, 8 S.W.3d 909 (Mo.App.2000) (credibility and weight of witness testimony within trial court’s discretion)
- Mehra v. Mehra, 819 S.W.2d 351 (Mo.banc 1991) ( credibility determinations defer to trial court)
- Herbert v. Harl, 757 S.W.2d 585 (Mo.banc 1988) ( credibility determinations within trial court discretion)
- Walton v. Gilton, 175 S.W.3d 170 (Mo.App.2005) (trial court best positioned to judge intangibles)
- Williams v. Frymire, 186 S.W.3d 912 (Mo.App.2006) (elements of adverse possession including actual and exclusive possession)
- Martens v. White, 195 S.W.3d 548 (Mo.App.2006) (exclusive possession, residential yard use)
- Houston v. Crider, 317 S.W.3d 178 (Mo.App.2010) (substantial evidence framework and evaluation)