Reed v. Wolyniec

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• determining that maintaining the lawn, planting flowers and shrubs, erecting a bird house, and using the land for recreational purposes for more than twenty-one years was sufficient to establish adverse possession claim
• single twenty-four hour attempt by record owner to interrupt claimant’s possession did not destroy continuity of adverse possession
• in explaining continuity element of doctrine of adverse possession, our Supreme Court has noted that “[possession of land is dominion over the land; it is not equivalent to occupancy”
• attempt to interrupt adverse possession is only valid where it results in actual interruption
• possession must be demonstrated to the general exclusion of others

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).