Also known as: hostile · adverse · adverse or hostile
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A requirement for adverse possession that the claimant's possession or use of land occur without permission from the true owner and under a claim of right inconsistent with the owner's title. The element ensures that the possession asserts ownership against the record owner rather than under a license or subordinate right.
Hector Hernandez erected a fence twenty feet inside the deeded line of Highland Farms' parcel and maintained it for the statutory period while farming the enclosed strip. Because the fence and farming occurred without permission and under a claim that the strip belonged to Hector, the possession satisfied the hostile or adverse element and supported title by adverse possession.
Hana Hashimoto offered only the portions of a predecessor's deposition describing seasonal grazing on the disputed strip. The adverse party required introduction of the remaining testimony showing the grazing occurred without permission and under a claim of ownership, allowing the court to evaluate whether the use met the hostile or adverse element.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Hakeem Harris testified that he had always believed the disputed strip was his. When counsel examined him about an earlier letter stating he had received oral permission, the letter was shown only to opposing counsel upon request, preserving the ability to test whether the use had truly been hostile or adverse.
After leaving the firm, Harriet Hamilton's former partner represented a neighbor whose fence encroached on land Harriet had once cleared under a claim of right. Because the new matter was unrelated and the firm had screened Harriet, the representation did not violate rules even though the neighbor's interest was adverse to the record owner.
Hannah Hale grazed cattle on the strip for the full statutory period after the record owner posted no-trespassing signs. The use remained hostile or adverse because it continued without permission and in the same manner as an owner would use the land.
Hassan Hakim purchased land believing a fence marked the true boundary and later discovered the fence was inside the seller's deed line. Because the mutual mistake about the boundary had a material effect on the exchange, Hassan could avoid the contract while still asserting that his earlier possession had been hostile or adverse.
The claimant must show possession or use without permission from the true owner and under a claim of right inconsistent with the owner's title. Permission or subordination to the record owner defeats the element.
Yes. Many jurisdictions hold that possession under a mistaken belief of ownership is hostile or adverse when it is without permission and asserts ownership against the record title.
Hostile or adverse focuses on the absence of permission and the assertion of ownership inconsistent with the record title. Claim of right emphasizes the mental state or color of title under which the possession occurs. Some courts treat the two as overlapping or identical.
…assumed that the ordinance did not prevent the owner’s reasonable use of the property since the owner made no showing of an adverse effect on the value of the land. Because the restriction served a substantial public purpose, the Court thus held no taking had occurred. It is, of course, implicit in Goldblatt that a…