In Kaneb v. Lamay , Edward J. Kaneb wanted a court to declare him the owner of 6.91 acres of land which was situated between his property and that of an adjacent owner -- Scott Lamay.
Apparently, prior deeds showed the boundary lines of the properties had been in dispute since the mid-1840's.
Kaneb claimed the eastern boundary of his property was the tract line, while Lamay argued a western boundary -- located on Kaneb's parcel -- was the old fence line.
After the St. Lawrence County Supreme Court applied the "doctrine of practical location" and found the old fence line to be the controlling, Kaneb appealed to the Appellate Division, Third Department.
According to the AD3, prior deeds showed the parties' predecessors treated the fence line as the governing demarcation point.
And, because Kaneb couldn't "produce clear and convincing evidence of continuous, exclusive and hostile possession of the disputed parcel," he also wasn't able to show ownership by adverse possession.
Now that's fencing.
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Kaneb v. Lamay