Orr v. Mortvedt

735 N.W.2d 610 (2007)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The Twedt family owned a rock quarry which became a thirty acres lake filled by groundwater springs and runoff. They sold the real estate in a series of transactions conveying a portion of the lake bed and land surrounding it. The Sevde's purchased twenty acres of the lake bed with adjacent land in 1994. Ds purchased a tract west and north of the lake, including the northern tip of the lake bed, in 1996. P's acquired a parcel on the east side of the lake and including that part of the lake bed located between the parts previously purchased by the Sevdes and Ds. Ps then conveyed a portion of the property they had acquired, including a part of the lake bed, to Cameron. A boundary dispute arose between P and D. D contended their property extended to the water's edge on the west side of the lake. P claims that D's east boundary line lies west of the water's edge and P owns a narrow strip of land on the west side of the lake. Ps cut down trees and planted other vegetation on the disputed narrow strip of land. The Sevdes and P objected when D used the lake, for fishing and boating, parts of the lake beyond the boundaries of the lake bed owned by D. P, the Sevdes, and Cameron filed suit seeking resolution of the boundary dispute, whether the owners of the lake bed have a legal right to access the entire lake or only that portion of the lake, a declaration that they have the right to drain the water covering their property and fence it, a determination that they are entitled to exclusive possession, use and enjoyment of the minerals located within their respective properties, and compensatory damages for trespass and injunctive relief to prevent future trespasses by Ds. D countersued for a declaration of a legal right to use the entire lake, Ps have no right to drain the water from the lake and Ps be required to restore the lake water level to that which prevailed when D purchased their property in 1996, and Ps have no legal right to install or maintain a fence in the lake. D also sought reformation of their deed to conform it to the understanding of the parties to the 1996 conveyance: that D's east property line extends to the lake water's west edge and compensatory damages for the loss of the trees removed by P from the narrow strip of land claimed by D and P. The court rules that the parties are entitled to exclusive use and possession of their water covering their real estate described in their deeds, Ds are prohibited from entering upon or using the water overlaying the properties owned by Ps, who are legally entitled to construct a fence to mark the boundaries of their properties Ps are entitled to drain the water covering, mine minerals from, and restore wetlands upon their properties. D appealed.