DIVISIONS III and IV
CA07593
January 23, 2008
JAMES BOYSTER
AN APPEAL FROM SEBASTIAN
APPELLANT
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[CV2005307G]
V.
HON. STEPHEN TABOR, JUDGE
TERESA SHOEMAKE
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH
APPELLEE
INSTRUCTIONS
On April 23, 2007, the Sebastian County Circuit Court entered an order finding that
appellee Teresa Shoemake presented proof of a boundary line by acquiescence between
property belonging to her and appellant James Boyster. Appellant asserts that the circuit
court clearly erred in making that finding, contending that appellee failed to prove that there
was any mutual assent in establishing the boundary line. We affirm, holding that the circuit
court did not clearly err in finding that appellee presented sufficient evidence of mutual
recognition of a boundary line by acquiescence. However, we remand the case with
instructions to amend the decree by adding a more specific description of the boundary line
between the parties’ land.
The parties are adjacent landowners in southern Sebastian County, with appellee’s
property located south of appellant’s. Appellee, who acquired title to the property in 1996,
2
alleged that the parties had acquiesced to an old fence north of the true boundary line.
According to her testimony, the boundaryline dispute arose in summer 2005 when she lost
several hunting dogs on her property. When she went to the disputed area on her four
wheeler to find the dogs, appellee saw that the fence had been cut, rocks had been picked up,
and trees had been cut down. She saw appellant’s wife and asked, “What are you guys
doing?” Appellee then learned that appellant had surveyed the property and discovered that
the fence line was not on the boundary. Appellee described the fence as an old, rusty fence
that had grown into the trees and stated that the fence had been on the property her entire
life. She noted that her property was enclosed by fence on the west, north, and east sides.
A highway was located on the south bo