What can be used to prove an agreement fixing a boundary, as established in Gulf Oil Corp vs Marathon Oil Co.?

In Gulf Oil Corp vs. Marathon Oil Co., the court established that acts and conduct can serve as evidence of an agreement fixing a boundary. This means that the behavior and actions of the parties involved can demonstrate their intentions and mutual understanding regarding the boundary in question.

For instance, if two parties have consistently acted in a manner that reflects a specific boundary line—such as maintaining fences, cultivating land, or other actions that imply acceptance of that boundary—that conduct can be compelling evidence of their agreement.

This principle highlights that while written contracts and formal legal documentation are useful, they are not the sole means by which parties can convey their agreements, especially in matters concerning land boundaries. The court's emphasis on acts and conduct recognizes the importance of practical, everyday interactions in establishing legal relationships surrounding property rights. Thus, the focus is on the tangible expressions of agreement, rather than just formalized paperwork or testimonies, which can sometimes be insufficient to capture the nuances of real-estate boundaries.