Adverse Possession – Cases

Question 1

Howard v. Kunto

Answer 1

Tacking of adverse possession is permitted if the successive occupants are in privity.

1) Must be successive
2) Privity Required

Kuntos only there for one year. Everyone on street had deed to wrong house.

Question 2

Manillo v. Gorski

Answer 2

Exception to Open & Notorious

If there is a minor encroachment, then the person being adversely possessed against needs actual knowledge to constitute open and notorious.

Satisfied Objective Test:
Gorski operated in a way a person under claim of right would.

Was Gorski’s steps 15 inches onto Manillo’s property open?
YES, he didn’t do this secretly

Was it notorious?
NO, Manillo’s were not put on notice because the encroachment was small and couldn’t be determined just by looking at it.

Question 3

Walling v. Przybylo

Answer 3

An adverse possessor’s actual knowledge of the true owner is not fatal to an adverse possession claim.

(1) Actual Poss. b/c Walling using land in a reasonable way the true owner would
(2) Hostile Poss. b/c Walling operating in a way a person under a claim of right would

Even though Walling knew that Przybylo was the true owner of the land, he still satisfied reqs. for A/P