Dave T. Helm and Van E. Helm v. Ken Clark, Trustee, or his successor in trust, under the Ken Clark Living Trust dated March 28, 2006

Summary

The Wyoming Supreme Court held that Ken Clark established adverse possession of property enclosed by a longstanding fence separating adjoining agricultural properties. The court affirmed the adverse-possession determination but reversed and remanded because the district court failed to provide an adequately supported legal description of the disputed property and needed to address the effect of relocating an adjoining fence.

Holdings

1. Clark established a prima facie case of adverse possession by showing long-term enclosure of the disputed area with his property, use of the area for grazing livestock, and the Helms' awareness of the discrepancy between the fence and the true boundary.
2. The district court did not clearly err in finding that the Clark-Helm fence was a boundary fence rather than a fence of convenience, and Clark's use was therefore not permissive.
3. The Clark family's admission that the separate Clark-Nebeker fence was a fence of convenience did not collaterally estop or judicially estop Clark from asserting that the Clark-Helm fence was a boundary fence.
4. The district court's adverse-possession determination was valid, but its description of the disputed tract was clearly erroneous and inadequate; the matter had to be remanded for determination of the property's exact legal description.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court clearly erred in finding that Clark established adverse possession despite evidence concerning the fence's location, continuity, alleged permissive use, payment of taxes, and later relocation of an eastern fence.
2. Whether Clark was collaterally estopped or judicially estopped from asserting that the Clark-Helm fence was a boundary fence because Clark's family had characterized a different Clark-Nebeker fence as a fence of convenience.
3. Whether the district court's determination of the exact size and location of the adversely possessed property was supported by the evidence and constituted an adequate legal description.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded