134 Conn. App. 337
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Plaintiffs Skellys sue Bruchers for trespass and private nuisance on 64 Five Field Road, Madison, alleging ongoing use of plaintiffs' land for drives, wall, parking, debris disposal, and tetherball.
- Defendants claim a prescriptive easement and file a counterclaim for adverse possession, seeking to quiet title to the disputed area.
- The case was tried August 18–19, 2010; the court awarded $7,000 for trespass, abandoned nuisance claim, and quieted title in plaintiffs, rejecting adverse possession.
- Key issue is what specific area of plaintiffs' property defendants and predecessors in title continuously possessed for at least 15 years under a claim of right.
- Boundary questions arose from the Wests’ prior use and the 2008 boundary survey that delineated plaintiffs' and defendants' properties; exhibits and tacking were contested.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether adverse possession was proven under a claim of right | Skelly argues clear, hostile, open possession for 15 years. | Brucher contends the Wests’ and Bruchers’ use constituted possession. | No; trial court’s adverse-possession finding affirmed |
| Whether tacking the Wests’ possession to Brucher’s satisfies 15 years | Skelly contends insufficient proof of the occupied area to tack 15 years. | Brucher argues tacking is proper to reach 15 years. | Not proven; tacking failed |
| Whether the trial court properly rejected reliance on disputed exhibit map (identification only) for boundary proof | Skelly relies on boundary delineation supporting lack of encroachment. | Brucher relies on map to show occupancy. | Exhibit not in evidence; no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Eberhart v. Meadow Haven, Inc., 111 Conn. App. 636 (Conn. App. 2008) (adverse possession requiring clear, convincing proof and open possession)
- Har v. Boreiko, 118 Conn. App. 787 (Conn. App. 2010) (standard of proof for adverse possession)
- Durkin Village Plainville, LLC v. Cunningham, 97 Conn. App. 640 (Conn. App. 2006) (uninterrupted, connected possession required for adverse possession)
- Lisiewski v. Seidel, 95 Conn. App. 696 (Conn. App. 2006) (adverse possession under claim of title vs. claim of right; boundaries)
- Marquis v. Drost, 155 Conn. 327 (Conn. 1967) (tacking of predecessors as to reach fifteen-year period)
- Giulietti v. Giulietti, 65 Conn. App. 813 (Conn. App. 2001) (credibility and weight of witness testimony in adverse-possession cases)
- Woycik v. Woycik, 13 Conn. App. 518 (Conn. App. 1988) (shared dominion defeats exclusivity for adverse possession)