Brief of Kellogg v. Johnson

Brief of Kellogg v. Johnson, No. CV9971237S. Oct. 26, 2001. Facts: The plaintiffs, Jeffrey and Mary Jo Kellogg, sue the defendants, Maureen Johnson and her daughter, Kimberly Gonder, for trespassing. The defendants raise the special(a) defence of indecent self- willpower and counterclaim on that resembling basis. In 1970 the children of the Johnson family erected a make do on the property of the plaintiffs predecessors in name in the belief that the trim down belonged to their mother. The paddock area that was constructed on this stain was conspicuous to the ordinary observer. Since 1970 the area in brawl has been enjoyment exclusively and without interruption by the defendant. The defendants, since 1970, had made meaning(a) improvements to the land in dispute. Permission to use the land was neer sought from the plaintiffs predecessors in gentle. The plaintiffs asked the defendants to remove the fence once it was detect that the fence was on the plai ntiffs land title, but this request was denied by the defendant. Issue?

Whether the land on French Road that is in dispute has been acquired by the defendant through adverse self-command? Yes Rules: 1.To acquire title by adverse possession, the claimant must oust the owner of possession continuously for fifteen years by an open, visible, and exclusive possession under a claim of castigate with intent to use the property as the claimants own and without the coincide or permission of the owner. Holding: The court determines that the defendants have acquired title by adverse possession to the area southerly of the fence and including th! e fence.If you want to ticktack a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay