In a contentious, lengthy dispute between neighboring property owners over a tiny, two-foot-wide patch of land, Ansell.Law litigator Kelsey M. Barber recently secured the entry of summary judgment in her client’s favor. This outcome, hard-fought at every turn, vindicated her client’s rights and resulted in her obtaining title to the scrap of property that she and her family had used and maintained – openly, continuously, and exclusively – for over 60 years.
The case involved a critical, fundamental principle involving real property use, ownership, and acquisition: “adverse possession.” This refers to a method in which title to property can be transferred to a party other than the record owner if that party exercises “actual, exclusive, continuous, open, notorious, and hostile” possession of the property for at least 30 years. Barber’s client and her family had used the scrap of property at issue in this case as a small part of their driveway for over six decades, parking vehicles there and otherwise openly occupying the space without any disputes or challenges from neighbors.
That changed when an experienced real estate developer signed a contract to purchase a neighboring property and, through a survey, discovered that the tiny piece of the driveway was actually on the property he sought to acquire. He had also seen Barber’s client’s use of the driveway first-hand through multiple walk-throughs. Even though he was aware of this potential issue prior to closing, and notwithstanding that he was a sophisticated real estate purchaser who had been involved in scores of transactions, he did not raise the matter with Barber’s client until after he had completed the purchase.
When Barber’s client later sought to sell her property, and the putative purchaser also learned of the issue regarding the patch of driveway, the developer contended that he could “revoke” the right to use the disputed area at any time and/or erect a fence to preclude its use. He also rejected any discussion of granting an easement to Barber’s client, even though she offered to pay all costs and fees for preparing and filing the necessary documentation.
Barber, on behalf of her client, then filed suit against the developer, asserting her ownership of the property through adverse possession, as well as other claims. After Barber moved for the entry of summary judgment in her client’s favor, the judge agreed with Barber’s arguments, concluding that her client had “satisfied her burden of proof and established open and notorious use of the disputed slice of land and that same use has existed for more than 30 years. Accordingly, she had “established her right to the adverse possession of the small slice of the driveway.”
The Firm congratulates Kelsey for her hard work in obtaining this outstanding result for the client.