Merritt v. Brennan
2009 La. App. LEXIS 148, 3 So. 3d 646, 8 La.App. 3 Cir. 973 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Ownership of immovable property may be acquired through thirty years of acquisitive prescription if a party and their ancestors in title have maintained continuous, uninterrupted, peaceable, public, and unequivocal possession within visible bounds, even if this possession extends beyond their formal title.
Facts:
- In 1971, Mrs. Merritt's parents, the Wooleys, acquired the property, on which a house had been built in the 1940s.
- A visible boundary, an old fence line, had existed along the edge of the disputed tract since at least the 1940s, as recalled by Mr. Wooley from his childhood.
- In 1977, Lavan and Debbie Merritt purchased the property from the Wooleys and lived there continuously.
- The Merritts consistently used and maintained the disputed triangular tract, mowing the grass up to the old fence line and using a circular driveway located on it for parking and work activities.
- In 2001, the adjacent landowner, Imogene Rogers, commissioned a survey that placed stakes across the disputed property, indicating it was part of her tract.
- Despite the 2001 survey, the Merritts continued to use the disputed property as they always had, and Rogers took no legal action to evict them.
- In April 2007, Thomas Brennan and Kenneth Greer purchased the adjacent property from Imogene Rogers.
- Around August 2007, Brennan and Greer bulldozed the disputed tract, destroyed the old fence, and constructed a new fence and gate that blocked the Merritts' circular driveway.
Procedural Posture:
- On September 18, 2007, Lavan and Debbie Merritt (plaintiffs) filed suit against Thomas Brennan and Kenneth Greer (defendants) in the trial court.
- The Merritts sought a declaratory judgment to be named owners of the disputed property and also sought trespass damages.
- A bench trial was held on May 23, 2008.
- On June 3, 2008, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of the Merritts, declaring them the owners, ordering the removal of the fence, and awarding $2,500 in trespass damages and $2,500 in attorney fees.
- The defendants, Thomas Brennan and Kenneth Greer, appealed the trial court's judgment to this intermediate court of appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Did the Merritts acquire ownership of the disputed property through thirty years of acquisitive prescription by possessing it continuously, uninterruptedly, peaceably, publicly, and unequivocally, despite a survey indicating the property belonged to the defendants' predecessor in title?
Opinions:
Majority - Sullivan, Judge.
Yes. The Merritts acquired ownership of the disputed tract through thirty years of acquisitive prescription because they and their ancestors in title demonstrated continuous, uninterrupted, peaceable, public, and unequivocal possession for well over thirty years. The court gives great deference to the trial court's factual findings under the 'manifest error' standard of review. The Merritts provided substantial evidence, including testimony and photographs dating back to 1959, which proved they and their family had possessed the land up to a visible boundary (an old fence line) for decades. The defendants' argument that a 2001 survey interrupted this possession fails because the survey alone did not constitute an eviction or a loss of possession; the Merritts' actual use of the property continued uninterrupted until the defendants physically fenced them out in 2007.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the principle that an appellate court will not disturb a trial court's factual findings regarding acquisitive prescription absent manifest error, particularly when findings are based on witness credibility. It clarifies that a mere survey and placement of stakes are insufficient to interrupt possession for the purposes of acquisitive prescription. To interrupt possession, the titleholder must take actions that actually evict the possessor or otherwise cause them to lose physical control of the property, rather than just putting them on notice of a competing claim.
Unlock the full brief for Merritt v. Brennan