Pascual v. Perry

Syllabus

The plaintiffs appealed from the judgment of the trial court for the defendant on the count of her counterclaim alleging adverse possession of certain real property. They claimed, inter alia, that the court erroneously concluded that the defendant could tack the period of adverse possession of her predecessor in title, V, onto her own. Held: The trial court's conclusion that the defendant's and V's exclusive mainte- nance of the disputed area was sufficient to satisfy the open and visible use element of adverse possession was not clearly erroneous. The trial court's finding that V's possession of the disputed area was hostile was not clearly erroneous, as the court made its finding of hostile possession after properly considering and weighing all relevant evidence before it, including evidence allegedly demonstrating V's permissive use. The trial court did not err in its conclusion that the defendant was entitled to tack V's period of adverse possession onto her own, as evidence in the record was sufficient to establish V's implied intent to transfer possession of the disputed area to the defendant. This court declined to review the plaintiffs' inadequately briefed claim that the judgment of foreclosure rendered against the plaintiffs' predecessor in title interrupted the statutory period for adverse possession as a matter of law. (One judge dissenting) Argued September 16, 2024—officially released February 4, 2025