Stokes v. Cottrell

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court reviewed challenges to a judgment quieting title to three parcels of land from an intestate estate based on adverse possession. The court held that credible evidence supported the trial court’s finding that the plaintiffs had established adverse possession despite evidence that their initial possession was permissive, and that the Court of Civil Appeals had failed to give appropriate deference under the ore tenus rule. The judgment was reversed and remanded, including for consideration of the Alexander plaintiffs’ challenge to the allocation of the three parcels between them and Cottrell.

Holdings

1. The Court of Civil Appeals erred in reversing the circuit court's award of the three parcels to the plaintiffs because credible evidence supported the circuit court's finding that the plaintiffs had established superior title through adverse possession.
2. The Court of Civil Appeals failed to give the circuit court's factual findings the deference required by the ore tenus rule.
3. The separate allocation appeal was no longer moot because reversal of the judgment concerning the three parcels revived the Alexander plaintiffs' challenge to the circuit court's division of those parcels between Cottrell and the Alexander plaintiffs.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court of Civil Appeals erred by reversing the circuit court's award of three parcels to the plaintiffs on the ground that their possession was permissive rather than adverse.
2. Whether the circuit court's findings were supported by credible evidence and entitled to deference under the ore tenus rule.
3. Whether the Alexander plaintiffs' separate appeal concerning the allocation of the three parcels between Cottrell and the Alexander plaintiffs remained moot after reversal of the judgment concerning the three parcels.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded