Jones v. Gresham
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-00653-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-21-2007 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Ownership of driveway - Credibility of competing surveys Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-29-2006 Appealed from: UNION COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: Jaqueline Mask Disposition: AFTER HEARING ON LAND DISPUTE, CHANCELLOR FOUND THAT APPELLEE’S LAND SURVEY WAS MOST ACCURATE AND ISSUED A RULING IN THEIR FAVOR. Case Number: 2002-207 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | ALTON JONES AND GENEVIEVE C. JONES |
ROBERT SNEED LAHER |
||
| Appellee: | JAMES ABNER GRESHAM AND NORA RUTH GRESHAM | THOMAS D. MCDONOUGH |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Real property - Ownership of driveway - Credibility of competing surveys |
| Summary of the Facts: | James and Nora Gresham brought an action to quiet title against their neighbors Alton and Genevieve Jones after a dispute arose as to ownership of a driveway. In the alternative, the Greshams asked for title by adverse possession or for a prescriptive easement. The chancellor held the driveway was part of the Greshams’ property. The Joneses appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Joneses argue that the chancellor should not have relied upon the Greshams’ survey because it contained error. It is for the chancellor to determine the credibility of competing surveys. There is substantial credible evidence to support the chancellor’s finding. The surveyor who testified on behalf of the Greshams was the original surveyor who platted the subdivision in the 1960s. When he ran his recent survey, it coordinated with the original markers. He concluded from his survey that the boundary line between the Greshams’ and Joneses’ lots runs on the east edge of the disputed driveway. Therefore, the entire disputed driveway lay within the Greshams’ lot. On the other hand, the Joneses’ surveyor used as a starting point a forestry monument that was not in existence at the time the subdivision was originally plotted out. Thus, the chancellor was justified in giving more weight to the survey provided by the Greshams’ surveyor. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
