Nebraska Court of Appeals finds that Sarpy County District Court properly found disputed boundary line that possessors claimed by mutual recognition and acquiescence Campagna v. Higday, 14 Neb. App. 749 Filed May 16, 2006. No. A-04-1251. To claim a boundary by acquiescence, both parties must have knowledge of the existence of a line as the boundary, and therefore, the mere establishing of a line by one party and the taking by that party of possession up to that line is insufficient. In order to claim a boundary line by acquiescence, both parties must have knowledge of the existence of a line as the boundary, and therefore, the mere establishing of a line by one party and the taking by that party of possession up to that line is insufficient. Kraft v. Mettenbrink, supra. As in adverse possession cases, the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence for mutual recognition and acquiescence claims. See Nye v. Fire Group Partnership, 265 Neb. 438, 657 N.W.2d 220 (2003). The fence separating the properties was the boundary line by the evidence the owners offered that the neighboring owner accepted it.