Hestia Management, LLC, Hestia Investments, Ltd., and Troy Tucker v. Bernard Klimist and Laura Stuart

Summary

The Thirteenth Court of Appeals of Texas held that appellants raised genuine issues of material fact on each element of their adverse-possession affirmative defense concerning a retaining-wall encroachment. The court reversed the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the property owners and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. Yes. Taking appellants' evidence as true and indulging reasonable inferences in their favor, the retaining wall, related residential improvements, and appellants' asserted use and maintenance of the disputed area raised a genuine issue of material fact on every element of their ten-year adverse-possession defense.
2. Yes. The evidence did not establish as a matter of law that the approximately nine-and-a-half-inch retaining-wall encroachment was insufficient to provide notice or demonstrate adverse possession.

Questions Presented

1. Whether appellants raised a genuine issue of material fact on each element of their adverse-possession affirmative defense.
2. Whether the evidence concerning the retaining wall and its use raised fact issues as to actual and visible possession, hostile and adverse possession, open and notorious possession, peaceable possession, exclusive possession, and continuous use or enjoyment for ten years.
3. Whether the trial court erred by granting summary judgment on the Klimists' trespass claims and rejecting the adverse-possession defense as a matter of law.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded