10 N.E.2d 917 (Ind. 1937)
Appellee Ross and appellant Marengo Cave Company owned adjoining tracts of land in Crawford County, Indiana.1 The only entrance to Marengo Cave was located on appellant's land, roughly 700 feet from the boundary line, and the cave itself extended under portions of both properties.2
In September 1883, young people discovered the cave entrance on land then owned by Stewart.3 Successive owners immediately took possession of the entire cave, explored it, publicized its existence through newspapers and other means, charged admission fees to visitors, excluded those who would not pay, constructed concrete walks and steps inside, and provided guides, all while claiming ownership of the whole cavern and believing it lay entirely under their own land.4
Ross had lived near the cave since 1903 and bought his land in 1908.5 He first visited the cave in 1895 and paid admission on multiple occasions thereafter, but he and his predecessors never occupied any part of the underground passages, and the cave operators' activities did not interfere with his surface use.6
No one realized that the cave extended under Ross's land until a 1932 court-ordered survey by a civil engineer established the boundary line through the cave.7 Ross had requested a survey in 1929.8 He then sued to quiet title to the portion of the cave under his land, appellant answered and cross-claimed to quiet title to the entire cave, a jury found for Ross, and the trial court denied appellant's motion for a new trial based on insufficient evidence.9
Whether appellant acquired title by adverse possession to the portion of Marengo Cave extending under appellee's land?10
Section 2-602 Burns Rev. St. 1933 provides that actions for the recovery of the possession of real estate must be commenced within twenty years.11 All the authorities agree that before the owner of the legal title can be deprived of his land by another's possession, through the operation of the statute of limitation, the possession must have been actual, visible, notorious, exclusive, under claim of ownership and hostile to the owner of the legal title and to the world at large (except only the government) and continuous for the full period prescribed by the statute.12
No. Facts of the Case: Appellee Ross and appellant Marengo Cave Company owned adjoining tracts of land in Crawford County, Indiana. The only entrance to Marengo Cave was located on appellant's land, roughly 700 feet from the boundary line, and the cave itself extended under portions of both properties. In September 1883, young people discovered the cave entrance on land then owned by Stewart. Successive owners immediately took possession of the entire cave, explored it, publicized its existence through newspapers and other means, charged admission fees to visitors, excluded those who would not pay, constructed concrete walks and steps inside, and provided guides, all while claiming ownership of the whole cavern and believing it lay entirely under their own land.
Ross had lived near the cave since 1903 and bought his land in 1908. He first visited the cave in 1895 and paid admission on multiple occasions thereafter, but he and his predecessors never occupied any part of the underground passages, and the cave operators' activities did not interfere with his surface use. No one realized that the cave extended under Ross's land until a 1932 court-ordered survey by a civil engineer established the boundary line through the cave. Ross had requested a survey in 1929.
He then sued to quiet title to the portion of the cave under his land, appellant answered and cross-claimed to quiet title to the entire cave, a jury found for Ross, and the trial court denied appellant's motion for a new trial based on insufficient evidence. The established facts demonstrate that appellant's possession of the portion of the cave under appellee's land failed to satisfy the visible, notorious, and exclusive elements of adverse possession.13 Subsequent operations of charging fees and making improvements continued under that belief.14 Because the trespass concealed itself by its subterranean nature, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until discovery in 1932, well short of the required twenty-year period of open and notorious possession.15 The jury verdict for appellee is therefore supported by the evidence.16
Appellant did not acquire title by adverse possession to the portion of Marengo Cave extending under appellee's land, and the judgment for appellee is affirmed.17