Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

PORT HURON TOWNSHIP PARK COMMISSION v. BLUSKA.

QUINN, J.

Plaintiff filed action in ejectment to obtain possession of certain land in the township of Port Huron, St. Clair county, on the basis of fee title. Defendant contested on the basis of title by adverse possession. The trial court held that defendant established adverse possession and judgment entered accordingly.

On appeal, plaintiff lists six questions in its statement of questions involved, but it is the opinion of this Court that there is only one question involved, namely: does the record clearly preponderate against the finding of the trial court on the question of adverse possession?

Adverse possession is a question of fact. Yatczak v. Cloon (1946), 313 Mich. 584. The trial court heard the case without a jury. Unless the evidence clearly preponderates against the finding by the trial court, it must be affirmed. Lynes v. J.R. Heineman and Sons, Inc. (1961), 363 Mich. 276. The evidence does not so preponderate here; in fact, the record contains substantial evidence to support the finding of the trial court.

Affirmed, with costs to defendant.

J.H. GILLIS, P.J., and T.G. KAVANAGH, J., concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PORT HURON TWP. PK. COMM. v. BLUSKA
(Nov 15, 1965)