Easement, Boundary & Trespass Disputes in Arizona
Patrick Nackley represents Arizona property owners on both sides of neighbor disputes: the owner whose land is being used or taken, and the owner accused of taking it. A wall, driveway, fence, shed, or roadway sits where it should not, or someone has been using a path or road for years and now claims a right to it. The dispute can be decades old by the time it reaches an attorney, and the first question is whether the ten year clock under A.R.S. § 12-526 has already run.
Trespass is the simplest of these claims. A neighbor who enters or leaves something on your land without permission is liable, but the remedy that matters is usually an injunction ordering removal, not a damages award. Encroachments are trespass with a structure attached, and they raise the same choice: force removal, or convert the encroachment into a recorded easement or a boundary line adjustment for a price. Prescriptive easements and adverse possession are the mirror image, where the neighbor argues that use for ten years has ripened into a right you can no longer stop. Arizona courts hold the claimant to a clear and convincing standard on every element. But once certain facts are shown, the burden shifts to the owner, and an owner who does not know that has usually already lost the argument by the time s/he learns of it.
Boundary disputes have a third theory that owners rarely know about. In Beck v. Neville, 256 Ariz. 415 (2024), the Arizona Supreme Court confirmed that Arizona recognizes boundary by acquiescence, set its elements, and required clear and convincing proof of each. Patrick tried a four day prescriptive easement case to the bench in 2026 and has briefed these theories from both sides.
A written communication to a neighbor, sent at the right time and stating the right thing, can preserve a right that would otherwise be lost. The same letter, sent at the wrong time or stating the wrong thing, can hand the neighbor the admission s/he needs. Which one you send, and whether you should send anything at all, is a judgment call that depends on facts Patrick will want to review before any action is taken.
What we handle
Representative matters.
Trespass by a neighbor, a contractor, or an association, including repeated entry and dumping
Encroaching walls, fences, driveways, pools, and structures built across the boundary
Boundary line disputes, survey conflicts, and legal description errors
Prescriptive easement, adverse possession, and boundary by acquiescence claims, asserted and defended
Blocked or disputed access, ingress and egress, and easements by necessity
Scope, maintenance, and overburdening of express road and utility easements
Tree, wall, drainage, and wash disputes between adjoining owners
Quiet title actions, injunctions, lis pendens, and damages
How we approach it
A disciplined, strategy-first method.
Get the survey first
Nothing productive happens in a boundary case until a licensed surveyor has staked the line. Patrick retains the surveyor early and reads the legal descriptions himself.
Fix the timeline
Aerial imagery, county records, permits, and neighbor declarations establish when the use began or structure was erected. That date decides whether A.R.S. § 12-526 helps you or hurts you, and the side that builds the timeline first usually controls the case.
Say the right thing to the neighbor, or say nothing at all
There is a communication that preserves title and a communication that forfeits it, and they can look alike to the person writing them. Patrick decides which, if either, is prudent, and when.
Choose the remedy before the complaint
Removal, damages, a purchased easement, or a boundary line adjustment are different cases with different evidence. The remedy is chosen in discussion with the client before a letter or a complaint is drafted, and the pre-suit steps that put attorney fees on the table under A.R.S. § 12-1103 are undertaken in the right order.
Frequently asked
Questions clients often ask.
- My neighbor built a wall on my property. Can I make them remove it?
- Often, yes, but not always, and the answer depends on three things: the survey, when the wall went up, and what has been said or written between the owners since. A neighbor who has maintained an encroachment long enough may claim the land under A.R.S. § 12-526, and a court weighs the cost of removal against the harm. Some of these cases are resolved in a week with one letter. Others have already been conceded when the owner first calls. Finding out which is the purpose of the first meeting.
- How long does a neighbor have to use my land before they can claim it?
- Ten years under A.R.S. § 12-526, applied to prescriptive easements by Ammer v. Arizona Water Co., 169 Ariz. 205 (App. 1991). The clock can be stopped, and a use that began with permission never ripens at all. Spaulding v. Pouliot, 218 Ariz. 196 (App. 2008). But the way the clock gets stopped is specific, and the way to prove permission is also specific, so an owner who tries to do either informally often makes the neighbor's case for him or her. Consult a licensed professional before oral or written communications.
- My neighbor says the fence has been the property line for years. Does that matter?
- It can. Arizona recognizes boundary by acquiescence. Beck v. Neville, 256 Ariz. 415 (2024). The claimant must prove several elements by clear and convincing evidence. Whether the elements exist to prove or defeat a claim depends on the facts, recorded deeds and the survey. That is a review of the documents, not a guess.
- Can I recover attorney fees in a boundary or quiet title case?
- Sometimes. A.R.S. § 12-1103 creates a path to fees for a quiet title plaintiff, but only if specific steps are taken before filing, in a specific order, with specific timing. Owners who file first and learn about the statute later have given up the fees. A contract or easement agreement with a fee clause can also support them.
- Do you handle cases outside Maricopa County?
- Yes. Patrick appears in Superior Courts statewide and the Arizona Court of Appeals. Rural access and road disputes, including in Pinal, Yavapai, Pima, and Cochise Counties, are a regular part of the practice.