Appeals court hears dispute over 1975 judgment, chain of title and adverse possession in Cutting Edge Real Estate v. Russell

Oral argument Tuesday in Cutting Edge Real Estate v. Russell centered on whether a 1975 trial court order that identified certain parcels as partnership property remains a valid factual predicate for title, and on closely related questions about deeds, adverse possession, ouster of a cotenant and estoppel.

Why the appeal matters: The case involves multiple decades of litigation and affects who holds fee title to rural parcels that were litigated in earlier proceedings. The outcome could change the legal and practical ownership of many parcels and determine whether later purchasers who received personal‑representative deeds acquired full fee interests.

Appellant Steven Rogers (arguing for Cutting Edge Real Estate) told the panel the critical questions are the validity of the 1975 facts and the trial court’s adverse‑possession findings. "First, the court the trial court errored when it invalidated the factual findings of the 1975 judgment," Rogers told the court, and he urged that the 1975 determination that certain listed parcels were partnership assets should remain a controlling factual finding even if the 1975 remedy was no longer enforceable.

Opposing counsel Jeremy Reitzel, arguing for the Hunt parties, said…