Facts
- Gary and Cristina Worden owned a residential lot in a platted subdivision and believed a nearby roughly 400-square-foot tract was part of their property.
- For about 11 years, the Wordens treated the tract as their own by maintaining trees and plants and caring for the area as part of their landscaping.
- The Wordens sold their lot to A2 Creative Group, LLC (A2), whose members were Kathy and Jason Ayers.
- After purchasing the property, the Ayerses continued maintaining the trees and plants on the tract and also used the area as part of their driveway and walkway.
- Neither the Wordens nor the Ayerses asked Soheil Anderson, the neighboring owner, for permission to use or maintain the tract.
- Anderson later commissioned a survey, which showed the disputed 400-square-foot tract fell within Anderson’s legal description, not A2’s.
- A2 filed suit to quiet title, claiming it had acquired title to the tract through adverse possession based on its and the Wordens’ successive use.
- Following a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for A2, finding adverse possession. Anderson appealed.
Issues
- Whether substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that A2’s and its predecessor’s possession of the disputed tract was exclusive for the statutory period.
- Whether substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that A2’s and its predecessor’s possession was continuous for Missouri’s ten-year adverse-possession period, including whether the periods of possession could be tacked through privity.
Decision
- The Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, affirmed the judgment quieting title in A2.
- The court held there was substantial evidence that A2 and the Wordens possessed the tract exclusively, using and maintaining it in a manner consistent with ownership of a residential yard area.
- The court held there was substantial evidence of continuous possession for the required period because the Wordens’ possession was followed without interruption by A2’s possession, and Missouri law permits tacking between successive occupants in privity.
Legal Principles
- To establish title by adverse possession in Missouri, a claimant must prove possession that is actual, hostile, open and notorious, exclusive, and continuous for the statutory period (generally ten years), by a preponderance of the evidence.
- In a bench-tried case, appellate review asks whether there is substantial evidence to support the judgment, whether the judgment is against the weight of the evidence, or whether the trial court misstates or misapplies the law; the appellate court views evidence and reasonable inferences in favor of the judgment and does not reweigh credibility.
- “Exclusive” possession does not require constant physical exclusion of all others; it requires dominion and control consistent with ownership of the type of property at issue (here, residential boundary-area yard use such as landscaping, maintenance, and related use).
- “Continuous” possession is measured by use appropriate to the land’s character and location; ongoing yard-type maintenance and everyday residential use can satisfy continuity.
- Tacking is allowed when successive possessors are in privity (such as through a conveyance), allowing their consecutive periods of possession to be combined to meet the statutory period.
Conclusion
A2 Creative Group, LLC v. Anderson holds that long-term residential use of a small boundary-area strip—through landscaping, maintenance, and use as part of a driveway and walkway—can satisfy the exclusivity and continuity elements of Missouri adverse possession, and that successive owners in privity may tack their periods of possession to meet the ten-year requirement; the appellate court therefore affirmed the judgment quieting title in A2.