Archives for posts with tag: adverse possession claim

As stated previously, the law of adverse possession is founded on notice.  Thus, a claimant must make an actual, visible, appropriation of the land in dispute.  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Section 16.021(1).  The requirement of an open, notorious, and visible claim is based on the policy that existing rights in land should not be lost without giving the owner an opportunity to take preventive action by taking prompt action to dispute the claim.

The notice provided to the record owner need not be actual, express notice.  Instead, constructive notice may be presumed from the nature and extent of the acts of adverse possession.  However, if no expressed claim is presented to the record owner, the adverse possession must be so open and notorious, and manifested by such open or visible acts, that knowledge on the part of the title holder may be presumed.  Visible appropriation is typically a fact issue.

The claimant’s appropriation of the land must wholly exclude the record owner.  Mowing the grass, planting flowers, or maintaining the hedge does not constitute a type of appropriation sufficient to give notice of exclusive and adverse possession by the claimant.  However, planting a hedge to establish a boundary line and barrier between the property claimed and the adjacent property may constitute a type of action which will support the basis for adverse possession.

Allowing cattle to graze on another’s land is insufficient, by itself, to establish title by adverse possession.  However, grazing combined with the construction of sturdy enclosures, such as a boundary line fence, may rise to such level.

Fencing of land is one form of visible appropriation.  However, a fence which exists before the claimant takes possession of the land is considered a casual fence that does not support a claim for adverse possession unless the claimant can show the purpose why the fence was erected.  Maintaining or repairing a casual fence generally does not transform a casual fence into a designed enclosure.  Where a casual fence is substantially modified to give the record owner notice that it’s character has changed (such as removing a barbed wire fence and constructing a chain link fence), such may constitute a basis for adverse possession.

Scott Alagood is Board Certified in Commercial and Residential Real Estate Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and may be reached at alagood@dentonlaw.com or www.dentonlaw.com.
 

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/+RScottAlagood?rel=author”>Google</a&gt;

To establish a claim by adverse possession, a claimant must enter the land with a claim of right inconsistent and hostile with that of another person.  Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Section 16.021(1).  A “claim of right” is defined as the claimant’s intention to appropriate or claim the land as his or her own.  Such claim of right may be established by a public declaration of the claim or by visible and apparent acts.  The verbal assertion of a claim is not necessary.

The claimant need not understand or maintain that the claim of right he or she is relying upon is actually adverse to that of the record title holder.  However, a mistake as to whom actually holds record title is not sufficient to establish adverse possession where the land is shared.

If the appropriation and possession of the land was done through permission or with the consent of the record title holder, then such will not suffice to establish adverse possession.

Adverse possession cannot be established where the claimant recognizes that another person holds title to the land or has offered to purchase the land from the title holder in such a way that would show that the claimant admitted that the title holder is the real owner.

In certain instances (as will be discussed in Part III), visible appropriation may be taken as evidence of a claim of right when the claim of right is not otherwise expressed.

As you can see the law of adverse possession is founded on notice.  Existing rights in land should not be lost without giving the owner an opportunity to take preventative action by taking prompt action to dispute the claim.

R. Scott Alagood is a board certified attorney in both Commercial and Residential Real Estate Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.
 

<a href=”https://plus.google.com/+RScottAlagood?rel=author”>Google</a&gt;

The elements of an adverse possession claim or “title by limitations” claim depend on which particular statute of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code applies.  The remainder of this series shall discuss each separate statute in more detail.  For now, start with the proposition that there are statutes which contain limitations periods of 3, 5, and 10 years, an also three (3) statutes which have 25 year limitations periods.  Each statute has certain elements which are common with the other statutes and its own particular set of elements which must be proven to establish title by “limitations” or “adverse possession”.

The common elements which must be proven in order to establish such a claim are as follows:  (1) visible appropriation and possession of the land, sufficient to give notice to the record title holder, that it (2) peaceable, (3) under claim of right hostile to the title holder’s claim, and (4) that continues for the duration specified in the applicable statute.*

Each particular statute will require additional elements beyond those described herein.  Those elements will be discussed in the future parts of this series.  However, neither knowledge of the rights of the record holder nor any intent to dispossess the record owner of the real property is a required element of an adverse possession claim.  An adverse possession claim must be established by the strength of the claimant’s title (veracity and accuracy of the proof of each element of the applicable limitations statute) and not on the weakness of the record owner’s title (or lack of evidence thereof).  There are no presumptions favoring an adverse possession claimant’s claim.  The burden of proof solely rests on the adverse possession claimant.  An adverse possession claim is typically a question of fact not law.

*Each of these elements als have sub-parts or sub-factors which need to be considered, and which will also comprise a future Part in the remainder of this series.

Please contact R. Scott Alagood at Alagood@dentonlaw.com or www.dentonlaw.com.
<a href=”https://plus.google.com/+RScottAlagood?rel=author”>Google</a&gt;