Blaylock, William B. and Elaine C. v. Holland, Thomas P. and Kimberly, 396 S.W.3d 720

Boundary dispute between Blaylocks and Hollands over a rear lot boundary and a disputed strip of land.
Hollands built a chain link fence in August 1999 alleged by Blaylocks to be on or within an easement at the rear of the Blaylock property.
Plaintiff Blaylocks sued to quiet title in 2009; Hollands counterclaimed for adverse possession.
Trial court awarded Hollands title to the disputed strip by adverse possession after finding ten years of peaceable, adverse use.
Before August 1999, evidence showed Hollands believed the wooden fence marked the boundary and used their yard, but no exclusive hostile possession of the strip.
Court held the evidence insufficient to prove adverse possession for the statutory period.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence supports adverse possession by Hollands	Blaylocks argue no hostile, exclusive use for ten years	Hollands contend use since 1995 showed hostility to Blaylocks' ownership	No; evidence legally insufficient.

Rhodes v. Cahill, 802 S.W.2d 643 (Tex. 1990) (requires ten years of actual, hostile possession)
Tran v. Macha, 213 S.W.3d 913 (Tex. 2006) (actual possession must demonstrate exclusive ownership)
Ellis v. Jansing, 620 S.W.2d 569 (Tex. 1981) (intent to claim property is necessary for adverse possession)
Masonic Bldg. Ass'n. of Houston, Inc. v. McWhorter, 177 S.W.3d 465 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist] 2005) (pre-August 1999 actions not necessarily hostile to ownership)
Bywaters v. Gannon, 686 S.W.2d 593 (Tex. 1985) (mere occupancy without hostile intent is insufficient)
AutoZone, Inc. v. Reyes, 272 S.W.3d 588 (Tex. 2008) (review of no-evidence standard for sufficiency)
City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (if more than scintilla, evidence supports)
Croucher v. Croucher, 660 S.W.2d 55 (Tex. 1983) (no-evidence standard applicable to adverse findings)