## Facts

- George and Jody Poullos bought a completed home on Lot 368 in an Omaha subdivision in November 2001, with sod, an underground sprinkler system, and a sidewalk already in place.
- The adjacent Lot 367, owned later by Pine Crest Homes, LLC, was vacant for years and initially appeared as dirt and weeds next to the sod line.
- Believing their property extended to the sod line, the Poulloses maintained the sod area for more than 10 years by mowing, fertilizing, watering, maintaining the sprinkler system, and clearing snow from the sidewalk.
- In 2013, when Pine Crest began construction on Lot 367, a survey showed a wedge-shaped area (about 667 square feet) that the Poulloses had maintained was actually within Lot 367.
- The Poulloses sued for an injunction to stop construction and to quiet title to the wedge based on adverse possession; the district court denied injunctive relief but quieted title in the Poulloses after a bench trial.
- Pine Crest appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Poulloses proved all elements of adverse possession for the statutory 10-year period, particularly that their possession of the disputed wedge was sufficiently open and notorious to provide notice to the record owner.

## Decision

- The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the judgment quieting title in favor of the Poulloses.
- The court remanded with directions to enter judgment for Pine Crest Homes, LLC.
- The court held the Poulloses failed to prove the “notorious” element of adverse possession by a preponderance of the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- To acquire title by adverse possession, the claimant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence actual, continuous, exclusive, notorious, and adverse possession under a claim of ownership for 10 years.
- Possession is “notorious” only if acts of dominion are so open and visible that an ordinarily prudent owner would be on notice that another is asserting a hostile claim.
- Enclosure is not required, but the claimant must show visible and conspicuous evidence of possession; ordinary residential maintenance that is consistent with common neighborhood conditions may be insufficient.
- In a residential subdivision, mowing, watering, and similar lawn care—along with use of a largely invisible underground sprinkler system—generally does not signal a clear claim of ownership to a neighboring record owner without additional, obvious boundary markers or improvements.

## Conclusion

The court rejected adverse possession where the claimed acts were routine residential lawn maintenance and an underground sprinkler extending past the lot line, because those acts were not sufficiently open and conspicuous to put a reasonable owner on notice of a hostile claim to the disputed land.


Poullos v. Pine Crest Homes, LLC, 876 N.W.2d 356 (Neb. 2016)