Facts: Petitioner Noel Proctor filed suit against respondent Robert Huntington in the Superior Court for Skamania County seeking to eject Huntington from his property after a survey of the property revealed that Huntington had inadvertently constructed his home on it. The trial court ordered, in light of the fact that both parties had reasonably believed that Huntington’s home was located on Huntington’s property rather than on Proctor’s property when it was constructed, Huntington to pay Proctor the fair market value of the land upon which the home was constructed. Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision, concluding that it was consistent with existing case law. Proctor appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s): Does Proctor have an absolute right to eject Huntington from his property as a trespasser?

Conclusion: Justice Stephens’ opinion for the Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, holding that as Huntington had acted in good faith it would be unfair and unjust to require him to remove his entire home from Proctor’s property as the benefit to Proctor would be trivial in comparison to the hardship imposed upon Huntington. Thus, the Court ordered Huntington to pay Proctor the fair market value for the land upon which the home was constructed.

Docket No. 82326-0 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 36087-0)

Petitioner: Noel Proctor

(Counsel: Emmelyn Hart-Biberfeld, Katharine W. Mathews, and Philip Albert Talmadge)

Respondent: Robert Huntington

(Counsel: Bradley W. Andersen and Philip Justin Haberthur)

Briefs:

Argument: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:30pm

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Thursday, August 19th, 2010

Prevailing Party: Robert Huntington (Respondent)

Vote: 5-4

Citation: Pending

Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-)

Madsen

Johnson

Alexander

Sanders
(Dissent)

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson

Stephens
(Majority)