Adverse Possession

Adverse possession is a doctrine that transfers ownership of land from the title holder to a trespasser who occupies the land for a sufficient period of time, provided specific conditions are met. The doctrine serves multiple policies: rewarding productive use of land, punishing owners who sleep on their rights, clearing stale claims, and quieting title.

The traditional elements require the adverse possessor's occupation to be: (1) actual — physical use of the land; (2) open and notorious — visible enough that a reasonable owner would discover it; (3) exclusive — not shared with the true owner or the public; (4) continuous — uninterrupted for the statutory period; and (5) adverse/hostile — without the owner's permission.

The "hostile" element is interpreted differently across jurisdictions. Some require only objective hostility (occupation inconsistent with the owner's rights regardless of the possessor's state of mind). Others require good faith (the possessor genuinely believes they own the land). A few require bad faith or intentional encroachment.

Tacking allows successive adverse possessors in privity (connected by sale, gift, or inheritance) to combine their periods to satisfy the statute. Howard v. Kunto illustrates tacking between successive possessors. However, the statutory period starts anew if possession is interrupted.

Van Valkenburgh v. Lutz shows the strict application of the actual possession requirement — cultivation of a portion of the land may not establish possession of the entire parcel. Nome 2000 v. Fagerstrom takes a more flexible approach, considering the character of the land and what acts of dominion are reasonable under the circumstances.