Estate of Engskow v. Cullen
This text of 428 So. 2d 388 (Estate of Engskow v. Cullen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The trial court properly found that appellant failed to present competent substantial evidence of a boundary dispute or uncertainty, an essential element of appellant’s affirmative defenses to ejectment of boundary by agreement or boundary by acquiescence. See King v. Carden, 237 So.2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970); Brooks v. Fletcher, 393 So.2d 630 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); and Seddon v. Edmondson, 411 So.2d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment of ejectment.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
428 So. 2d 388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estate-of-engskow-v-cullen-fladistctapp-1983.