## Facts

- A .357-acre parcel on Mt. Beacon in the Town of Fishkill, New York, contained a cottage within a larger 156-acre tract that had formerly been a seasonal resort community.
- Robert Ray’s mother originally occupied the premises under a lease that required rent for the land and provided that structures would pass to the lessor upon termination with compensation for improvements.
- In 1960, the lessor terminated the leases, the resort effectively shut down, and residents largely vacated; neighboring structures later deteriorated or were destroyed.
- In 1963, Robert L. Ray and his wife re-entered the cottage and, from 1963 to 1988, used it for about one month each summer.
- During and between seasonal visits, the Rays exercised control over the property by paying property taxes, maintaining fire insurance, keeping telephone and electric service, posting “No Trespassing” signs, securing the cottage with bars, shutters, and padlocks, and ejecting trespassers (including pursuing prosecutions for vandalism).
- In 1978, Beacon Hudson Mountain Corporation acquired the larger tract including the disputed parcel.
- In 1988, the Rays sued to quiet title by adverse possession; Beacon Hudson sought their removal.

## Issues

1. Whether “continuous possession” for adverse possession is satisfied where claimants physically occupy a seasonal cottage for about one month per year but regularly maintain, secure, and police the property during absences.
2. Whether the claimants’ pattern of use and control was sufficiently open and notorious to provide notice of an adverse claim to the record owner.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the trial court judgment quieting title in the Rays.
- The court held that continuity is assessed by considering both physical presence and other acts of dominion and control that owners of similar property would ordinarily undertake.
- The Rays’ seasonal occupancy, combined with repeated acts to maintain, secure, and protect the cottage and exclude others over the statutory period, satisfied continuous possession and supported the adverse possession claim.

## Legal Principles

- “Continuous possession” in adverse possession is evaluated in context; it does not require constant physical presence.
- Courts should consider whether the claimant’s physical use plus acts of dominion and control match the customary ownership pattern for property of similar character, condition, and location.
- Seasonal occupancy can be continuous when it reflects ordinary use of the property type and is accompanied by continuing owner-like actions such as maintenance, protection, and exclusion of trespassers.
- Evidence of securing and policing the premises, maintaining utilities and insurance, and paying taxes may support continuity and open-and-notorious possession when consistent with ordinary ownership of such premises.

## Conclusion

The court held that a seasonal cottage may be adversely possessed through periodic summer occupancy coupled with consistent, owner-like acts of maintenance, security, and exclusion during off-season periods, and it restored judgment quieting title in the claimants.


Ray v. Beacon Hudson Mountain Corp., 88 N.Y.2d 154 (N.Y. 1996)