Massey v. Lambert
| Docket Number: | 2011-CA-00296-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-27-2012 Opinion Author: Roberts, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Adverse possession Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Carlton, Maxwell, Russell and Fair, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-02-2011 Appealed from: Greene County Chancery Court Judge: G. Charles Bordis, IV Disposition: ADVERSE POSSESSION NOT ESTABLISHED Case Number: 2007-50-CB |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Virginia Massey |
WILLIAM HARVEY BARTON
BRANDON C. JONES |
|
|
| Appellee: | Ronald E. Lambert and Patricia Renee Lambert | GERALD ALAN DICKERSON | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Real property - Adverse possession |
| Summary of the Facts: | Virginia Massey sued siblings Ronald E. Lambert and Patricia Renee Lambert and claimed that she had adversely possessed some of their property. The chancery court found that Virginia and her predecessor in title failed to present a prima facie case of adverse possession based on evidence that Virginia and her predecessor in title, her husband, had permission to use the disputed property. Virginia appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | One who seeks to acquire real property by adverse possession must demonstrate the following six essential elements by clear and convincing evidence: the property must be under claim of ownership; actual or hostile; open, notorious, and visible; continuous and uninterrupted for a period of ten years; exclusive; and peaceful. The chancellor concluded that Virginia failed to prove adverse possession by clear and convincing evidence based on John’s testimony that he had given Virginia and her predecessor in title, Dennis, permission to use the disputed property. The chancellor did not err. It is true that an occupant of land who mistakenly believes the land lies within the boundaries established by his own deed, when the land actually belongs to another, may acquire title to that land by adverse possession. However, if possession is permitted by the owner, it cannot be adverse. There was no evidence that John ever withdrew his permission or his desire to exchange property so that Virginia could obtain the disputed property. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
