Ethics Victor and Phyllis Garber acquired a piece of real property by warranty deed. The deed was recorded. The property consisted of 80 acres enclosed by a fence that had been in place for over fifty years. The enclosed area was used to graze cattle and produce hay. Ten years later, William and Herbert Doenz acquired a piece of real property adjacent to the Garbers’ and employed a surveyor to locate their land’s boundaries. As a result of the survey, it was discovered that the shared fence was 20 to 30 feet inside the deed line on the Doenz property. The amount of property between the old fence and the deed line was 3.01 acres. The Doenzes removed the old fence and constructed a new fence along the deed line. The Garbers brought suit to quiet title. Doenz v. Garber, 665 P.2d 932, Web 1983 Wyo. Lexis 339 (Supreme Court of Wyoming)

1. What are the requirements of adverse possession?

2. Did the Doenzes act ethically in removing the fence? Did the Garbers act ethically in claiming title to property that originally belonged with the adjacent property?

3. Did the Garbers acquire title to the property between the fence and the deed through adverse possession?