Richard Osuch and Barbara D. Rivera v. David E. Gunnels and Linda M. Gunnels, 393 P.3d 898

In 1974 the Osuch family acquired an 80-acre parcel; title later passed to Richard Osuch and Barbara Rivera (Appellants).
In 1984 the Gunnels (Appellees) bought an adjacent 40-acre tract, moved into an existing house and, relying on realtor-placed stakes, built a fence in 1985 that enclosed an additional ~8 acres actually within the Osuch parcel.
From 1985 onward the Gunnels used and improved the disputed 8-acre area (house additions, barn, landscaping, trees, livestock) and lived there continuously for the statutory period.
Appellants discovered the mistaken boundary after acquiring title and attempted to sell the land; negotiations with the Gunnels (including a 2012 offer to sell) failed.
Appellants sued to quiet title; the Gunnels counterclaimed for, among other things, adverse possession and an implied access easement. The district court found adverse possession and an implied easement, denied promissory estoppel, and quieted title to the Gunnels.
On appeal Appellants challenged the adverse-possession ruling; Appellees sought attorney’s fees under W.R.A.P. 10.05.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Osuch)	Defendant's Argument (Gunnels)	Held
Whether Gunnels acquired title by adverse possession	Gunnels’ later attempts to purchase and negotiate show possession was not hostile or intended as ownership during the statutory period	Possession from 1985 was actual, open, notorious, exclusive, continuous, hostile, and under claim of right for the 10-year statutory period	Court affirmed: Gunnels satisfied all elements and acquired title by adverse possession
Whether Gunnels are entitled to appellate attorney’s fees under W.R.A.P. 10.05	Appeal was not frivolous; no basis for sanctions	Request sanctions because there was no reasonable cause for the appeal	Denied: court will not certify lack of reasonable cause and declines to award fees

Graybill v. Lampman, 332 P.3d 511 (Wyo. 2014) (appellate standards and adverse-possession element citation)
Murdock v. Zier, 137 P.3d 147 (Wyo. 2006) (adverse-possession gives new title; divestment only by conveyance, descent, or operation of law)
Helm v. Clark, 244 P.3d 1052 (Wyo. 2010) (burden-shifting and permissive use in adverse-possession context)
Galiher v. Johnson, 391 P.3d 1101 (Wyo. 2017) (definition of hostile possession and notice to true owner)
Meyer v. Ellis, 411 P.2d 338 (Wyo. 1966) (post-acquisition efforts to negotiate or acknowledge prior title do not divest title already acquired by adverse possession)