Jon A. Stenquist

Successfully established a prescriptive easement across multiple properties. Initially losing at trial, the Idaho Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case to the district court which granted roadway access to an 80-acre parcel via a prescriptive easement. This important decision clarified that one of the key elements of a prescriptive easement - “adverse and under a claim of right,” is a legal element, not a practical one. Because the owners of the two properties had been friends for generations, the trial court initially held that permission was implied. However, plaintiff was able to show that the use was legally adverse, albeit friendly. The Supreme Court decision also clarifies and discusses the various circumstances in which the parties bear the burden of proof of the necessary elements of prescriptive easements.

Parsons Behle & Latimer represented a cattle rancher who brought claims against a neighboring rancher for property damage, trespass, fence construction costs (Idaho Code section 35-103) and intentional driving of cattle onto the client’s land to graze without compensation. Parsons also successfully defended against the neighbor’s counterclaims, including a claim for prescriptive easement across the client’s lands. As the Supreme Court put it “This litigation stems from the contentious relationship between adjacent landowners over subjects as old as the American West: land, cattle, and fence lines.” On appeal, Parsons successfully obtained a reversal of the District Court who failed to award overgrazing damages, and successfully defended against the defendants’ issues raised on appeal.

Represented Chase Bank and successfully obtained summary judgment against claimants who raised multiple counterclaims including bad faith and predatory lending. The Supreme Court upheld the district court granting the lender’s motion for summary judgment and denied the borrowers’ motion to amend the counterclaims to add a fraud claim. The Supreme Court awarded Chase attorney fees on appeal.