STANLEY D. RODAMAKER, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee,
ELAINE K. BIERMANN, f/k/a ELAINE K. WESTEMEIER and KURT BIERMANN, Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs-Appellants.
from the Iowa District Court for Clayton County, David P.
appeal the district court decision finding plaintiff had
established title to certain property through adverse
possession and boundary by acquiescence. AFFIRMED.
Hillary J. Friedmann of Friedmann Law Office, Guttenberg, for
Christopher C. Fry of O'Connor & Thomas, P.C.,
Dubuque, for appellee.
Considered by Mullins, P.J., and Bower and McDonald, JJ.
and Kurt Biermann appeal the district court decision finding
Stanley Rodamaker had established title to certain property
through adverse possession and boundary by acquiescence. We
find the district court properly determined Rodamaker had
established a right to the property in question under a
theory of adverse possession. We affirm the decision of the
Background Facts & Proceedings
and the Biermanns own adjacent property in rural Clayton
County, with the Biermanns' property to the north of
Rodamaker's property. Rodamaker lives in a house on his
property, while the Biermanns' property is unimproved. On
February 5, 2013, Rodamaker filed a petition alleging he had
acquired title to a disputed area between the two properties
under theories of adverse possession and boundary by
acquiescence. The Biermanns denied Rodamaker's claims and
raised counterclaims asking to be confirmed as the owner of
the property in dispute and seeking damages against Rodamaker
trial, Rodamaker presented evidence to show a fence had been
treated as the boundary between the properties for more than
thirty years, although the fence did not represent the actual
property line. The actual property line was about one and
one-half feet north of Rodamaker's house. Rodamaker
maintained an area about twenty-feet wide north of the house,
which was between his house and the fence, by mowing, keeping
back trees, spraying for weeds, and planting flowers.
Boardman testified he previously owned the Rodamaker
property. He stated he was told the fence was the boundary
line when he purchased the property. David stated Elaine
Biermann approached him about using part of the disputed area
as a driveway to her property but he denied her request.
Denise Boardman purchased the property from David Boardman
and built the house. Denise obtained a variance from the
Clayton County Planning and Zoning Commission to build the
house closer to the west property line but stated she
believed there was twenty feet between the house and the
north property line so she did not think she needed a
variance on the north side. Denise also stated Elaine asked
her about putting a driveway over the disputed area and
Denise rejected the proposal.
Biermann testified when she purchased the property forty
years earlier she was informed the fence was not the property
line and the fence was present to keep the former owner's
sheep penned in. Elaine stated she was aware Rodamaker was
maintaining the disputed area north of his house. Jerry
Handke testified his father, who had previously owned the
Biermanns' property, put in a fence for sheep, but Handke
was unaware of the exact location of the fence.
district court determined Rodamaker had established title to
the disputed area under theories of adverse possession and
boundary by acquiescence. The court denied the Biermanns'
counterclaims. The Biermanns now appeal the decision of the