Warren v. Dunlap, 532 S.W.3d 725

The Warrens own and occupy a 234-acre tract; the Dunlaps (via family) own adjacent tracts. A 1.76-acre triangular parcel sits between them and was purchased by Juanita Dunlap in 2007 as part of a 40-acre Price tract.
In 2009 Juanita’s commissioned surveys showed the triangular parcel lay within her deed; shortly thereafter the Warrens sued claiming adverse possession of the triangle and a ten‑foot prescriptive easement over a driveway.
The case was tried to the bench; all disputed facts were proven by witness testimony (Warrens presented five witnesses; Dunlaps seven). No written findings of fact were requested.
The trial court found the Warrens failed to prove adverse possession or prescriptive easement and entered judgment for the Dunlaps.
The trial court also taxed one-half of Juanita’s pre‑litigation survey costs ($3,900) against the Warrens as court costs; the Warrens appealed that award.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Warrens)	Defendant's Argument (Dunlaps)	Held
Adverse possession of triangular parcel	The triangle was unused by Price and openly used/maintained by Honeycutts/Warrens long before Price sold to Juanita, satisfying adverse possession elements	Evidence was contested; trial court disbelieved Warrens’ testimony and found they failed to prove the required elements	Court affirmed: trial court’s credibility determinations stand; Warrens failed to carry burden (point denied)
Prescriptive easement over 10‑ft driveway	Installation of gates in 1960s and continuous use shows non‑permissive, adverse use for statutory period	Use was permissive or not proved adverse/continuous; trial court found Warrens did not meet clear‑and‑convincing burden	Court affirmed: credibility findings permissible; Warrens failed to prove prescriptive easement (point denied)
Taxing pre‑litigation survey costs as court costs	Survey costs were private, pre‑litigation, not court‑ordered and not authorized by statute or agreement; should not be taxed as costs	Dunlaps argued equitable discretion permits apportionment of costs in equity cases	Court reversed as to costs: trial court abused discretion—no statute or agreement authorized taxing those pre‑litigation surveys as court costs; struck $3,900 from judgment

Flowers v. Roberts, 979 S.W.2d 465 (Mo. App.) (elements for adverse possession)
Orla Holman Cemetery, Inc. v. Robert W. Plaster Trust, 304 S.W.3d 112 (Mo. banc) (elements for prescriptive easement; clear and convincing standard)
White v. Dir. of Revenue, 321 S.W.3d 298 (Mo. banc) (trier of fact may disbelieve uncontroverted testimony of party bearing burden)
State ex rel. Merrell v. Carter, 518 S.W.3d 798 (Mo. banc) (costs are statutory; courts have no inherent power to award costs absent authority)
Groves v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 540 S.W.2d 39 (Mo. banc) (item not taxable as costs unless authorized by statute or agreement)
Gieselmann v. Stegeman, 470 S.W.2d 522 (Mo.) (equity court may apportion costs where statute provides; did not authorize classification of particular nonstatutory items)