Summary
This Appellate Division decision reviews a trial court's grant of summary judgment dismissing the defendants' counterclaim for adverse possession in a boundary dispute involving a chain-link fence and gate. The appellate court reversed, holding that the defendants submitted sufficient evidence raising triable issues of fact regarding whether they possessed the disputed property exclusively, openly, and under a claim of right for the statutory ten-year period. Consequently, the motion for summary judgment was properly denied, allowing the adverse possession claim to proceed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the defendants acquired title to the disputed property by adverse possession under the 2008 amendments to RPAPL article 5
- Whether summary judgment was proper to dismiss the defendants' adverse‑possession counterclaim
Holdings
- The trial court erred; the summary‑judgment dismissal of the defendants' adverse‑possession counterclaim is reversed and the motion is denied.
Key quotations
“To establish a claim of title to real property by adverse possession, a party must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the possession was (1) hostile and under claim of right, (2) actual, (3) open and notorious, (4) exclusive, (5) continuous for the statutory period of 10 years.” (148 AD3d 672, 673)
Factual background
The plaintiff and defendants own adjoining parcels in Staten Island. A chain‑link fence with a gate separates the properties. The plaintiff alleges the defendants installed the gate on her land in or about November 2016. The defendants claim they owned the gate area by adverse possession, asserting continuous, exclusive use since purchasing their parcel in November 2006.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Richmond County granted summary judgment dismissing the defendants' adverse possession counterclaim; the defendants appealed.
Remand instructions
The motion for summary judgment dismissing the defendants' counterclaim alleging adverse possession is denied.