## Facts

- In 1982, Angela Green’s grandmother orally offered Green a piece of family land near Shaw Creek; the gift was never recorded and record title remained in other family members.
- Green selected a bluff-side area across the creek from her grandparents’ home and, for about ten years, treated it as her own; family members and neighbors consistently referred to the bluff parcel as Green’s property.
- From 1982 to 1992, Green gradually built a house and developed the site: clearing trees, excavating for a foundation, living on the land in summers, planting trees and shrubs, gardening, keeping poultry, and installing utilities and related improvements.
- Green also performed acts indicating control over a broader area, including improving access, placing a chain across an access road, posting no-trespassing signs, clearing undergrowth, and creating a trail.
- Green worked out of state during much of the year but returned each summer to reside on and work the property.
- In 1994, Allen Vezey bought the record title interest from Green’s grandparents after checking the title and considered using the land for a quarry.
- After the purchase, Green told Vezey the land was hers, not for sale, and that he should stay off; the trial court credited Green’s account.
- Green sued to quiet title by adverse possession to the “bluff area,” and the superior court awarded her the entire bluff area; Vezey appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Green proved the elements of adverse possession (continuous, open and notorious, exclusive, and hostile possession for the statutory period) against the record owners and Vezey as successor.
2. Whether the superior court erred by awarding Green title to the entire “bluff area,” rather than limiting title to the land actually possessed and used.

## Decision

- The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed the finding that Green established adverse possession.
- The court affirmed the award as to the north, east, and south portions of the area described by the superior court.
- The court remanded as to the west portion because the evidence did not support adverse possession of all land included in that segment and the legal description required narrowing to match actual possession.

## Legal Principles

- Adverse possession in Alaska requires possession that is continuous, open and notorious, exclusive, and hostile (under a claim of right) for the statutory period.
- Continuity is assessed in light of the property’s character; seasonal use can be continuous when consistent with normal use of remote rural land.
- Absent color of title to a larger tract, title obtained by adverse possession is limited to land actually and visibly used in a manner appropriate to its location and character.
- General assertions of ownership over a broad area do not expand the acquired parcel beyond boundaries indicated by visible acts of dominion.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Green’s adverse possession claim based on her long-term, visible, and owner-like use of the bluff house site and surrounding areas, but required the award to be limited to the portions actually possessed, remanding to correct an overbroad description of the western portion.


Vezey v. Green, 35 P.3d 14 (Alaska 2001)