adverse claim in Mississippi

2019As previously discussed, “[t]he question in the end . . . [still remains] whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would[-]be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Id. (quoting Johnson, 469 So. 2d at 90 - 91).

2019As previously discussed, “[t]he question in the end . . . [still remains] whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would[-]be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Id. (quoting Johnson, 469 So. 2d at 90 - 91).

2017Regardless of whether the fence remains standing at the time of filing suit, the court must determine “whether the inclosure, like other acts of possession, is sufficient to fly the flag over the land and put the true owner upon notice that his land is held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Snowden & McSweewy Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682, 687 , 16 So.2d 24, 25 (1943). ¶20.

2017Regardless of whether the fence remains standing at the time of filing suit, the court must determine “whether the inclosure, like other acts of possession, is sufficient to fly the flag over the land and put the true owner upon notice that his land is held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Snowden & McSweewy Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682, 687 , 16 So.2d 24, 25 (1943). ¶20.

2023Addressing the exclusive possession element of adverse possession, we stated that “the quality and quantity of possessory acts . . . may vary[,] . . . [but] [t]he question in the end is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Id. at 167 (¶17).

2009Exclusivity is defined as follows: “The question in the end is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Lynn v. Soterra, Inc., 802 So.2d 162, 167 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (quoting Rawls v. Parker, 602 So.2d 1164, 1168 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 18.

2015To stake a claim of ownership, the possessor must “fly [his] flag over the property” in such a way as to put the actual owner on notice that the property is “being held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Apperson v. White, 950 So.2d 1113, 1117 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (citing Walker v. Murphree, 722 So.2d 1277, 1281 (¶ 16) (Miss.Ct.App.1998)).

2013Under the claim-of-ownership element of adverse possession, the chancellor must determine whether the purported adverse possessor’s actions were sufficient to “fly a flag over the property” and put the actual owners on notice that the property was “being held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Apperson v. White, 950 So.2d 1113, 1117 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (citing Walker v. Murphree, 722 So.2d 1277, 1281 (¶ 16) (Miss.Ct.App.1998)).

2018To stake a claim of ownership, the possessor must “fly [his] flag over the property” in such a way as to put the actual owner on notice that the property is “being held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Apperson v. White, 950 So. 2d 1113, 1117 (¶7) (Miss.

2018To stake a claim of ownership, the possessor must "fly [his] flag over the property" in such a way as to put the actual owner on notice that the property is "being held under an adverse claim of ownership." Apperson v. White , 950 So.2d 1113 , 1117 (¶ 7) (Miss.

2011A “land owner must have notice, actual or imputable, of an adverse claim to his property in order for it to ripen against him, and the mere possession of land is not sufficient to satisfy the requirement of open and notorious.” Scrivener v. Johnson, 861 So.2d 1057, 1059 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2003) (citation omitted).

2010“A landowner must have notice, actual or imputable, of an adverse claim to his property in order for it to ripen against him, and the mere possession of land is not sufficient to satisfy the requirement of open and notorious.” Warehousing Mgmt., LLC v. Haywood Props., LP, 978 So.2d 684, 687 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2008) (quoting Scrivener v. Johnson, 861 So.2d 1057, 1059 (¶ 6) (Miss.Ct.App.2003)).

2024“When determining whether an adverse possessor has staked a proper claim of ownership, the relevant inquiry is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would-be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder on notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Id. at 1188-89 (¶30) (quoting O’Neal v. Blalock, 220 So. 3d 234, 240 (¶14) (Miss.

2022“When determining whether an adverse possessor has staked a proper claim of ownership, the relevant inquiry is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would[-]be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder on notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” O’Neal v. Blalock, 220 So. 3d 234, 240 (¶14) (Miss.

2009Exclusivity is defined as follows: “The question in the end is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Lynn v. Soterra, Inc., 802 So.2d 162, 167 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (quoting Rawls v. Parker, 602 So.2d 1164, 1168 (Miss.1992)). ¶ 18.

2001The question in the end is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership. *168 Rawls v. Parker, 602 So.2d 1164, 1168 (Miss.1992) (quoting Johnson v. Black, 469 So.2d 88, 90-1 (Miss.1985)).

2002The adverse possessor must "fly the flag over the land and put the true owner upon notice that his land [is] held under an adverse claim of ownership." Snowden McSweeny Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682 , 687, 16 So.2d 24 , 25 (1943). "[A] land owner must have notice, actual or imputable, of an adverse claim to his property in order for it to ripen against him, and the mere possession of land is not sufficient to satisfy the requirement of open and notorious." People's Realty , 336 So.2d at 1306 . ¶ 15.

1985In this sense, the case is analogous to Peoples Realty & Development Corp. v. Sullivan, 336 So.2d 1304, 1305 (Miss. 1976), which held: "Sporadic and temporary activity on the property is not sufficient to give notice of an adverse claim, nor is an owner put upon such notice by occasional pasturing of cows, or by occasional cutting of timber." 336 So.2d at 1305 .

2019To determine ownership and any claim that the adverse possessor may have, this Court must consider “whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder on notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” O’Neal, 220 So. 3d at 240 (¶14) (quoting Hill v. Johnson, 27 So. 3d 426, 431 (¶19) (Miss.

2017When determining whether an adverse possessor has staked a proper claim of ownership, the relevant inquiry is “whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder on notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Hill v. Johnson, 27 So.3d 426, 431 (¶ 19) (Miss.

2025“The possession must be sufficient to put another on notice, actual or imputable, of an adverse claim to his property.” Trotter v. Gaddis & McLaurin Inc., 452 So. 2d 453, 457 (Miss. 1984).

2018On appeal, the Revettes point out that the chancellor determined "[t]here was no evidence that the Fergusons ever put the Revettes on notice of their claim of title by adverse possession[.]" See Trotter v. Gaddis , 452 So.2d 453 , 457 (Miss. 1984) ("[P]ossession must be sufficient to put another on notice, actual or imputable, of an adverse claim to his property.

2019In most cases, the underlying question “is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would[-]be adverse possessor are sufficient to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Peagler v. Measells, 743 So. 2d 389, 390 (¶7) (Miss.

2004Peagler v. Measells, 743 So.2d 389 (¶ 7) (Miss.

2019In other words, while “such occupancy and use is not as rigidly or literally required in order to establish a claim of adverse possession for land which does not lend itself to permanent, useful improvement[,]” the “[p]ossession of such property” must still “be established by a continued claim evidenced by public acts of ownership.” Cole v. Burleson, 375 So. 2d 1046, 1048 (Miss. 1979).

2002Pieper , 513 So.2d at, 594-95; Cole v. Burleson, 375 So.2d 1046, 1048 (Miss.1979); Cook v. Mason, 160 Miss. 811 , 134 So. 139 (1931) (fenced pasture land more convincing than unfenced pasture land); see also Snowden & McSweeny Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682, 686 , 16 So.2d 24, 25 (1943) ("[T]he question in [adverse possession cases] is whether the inclosure, like other acts of possession, *603 is sufficient to fly the flag over the land and put the true owner upon notice that his land is held under an adverse claim of ownership.").

2022Orcutt, 243 So. 3d at 762 (¶15); Hill v. Johnson, 27 So. 3d 426, 431 (¶23) (Miss.

2022Orcutt v. Chambliss, 243 So. 3d 757, 762 (¶15) (Miss.

2017Snowden & McSweeny Co. v. Hanley, 195 Miss. 682 , [687,] 16 So.2d 24, 25 (1943)[.] In other words, the adverse possessor (in this case, Double J) must present some proof that its occupation of the record owner’s property was hostile, and that the record owner—aware of the adverse possessor’s hostile occupation—took no action to prevent adverse possession .... [[Image here]] Double J Farmlands, Inc. v. Paradise Baptist Church, 999 So.2d 826, 829 [ (]¶ 15) (Miss. 2008). (2) Actual or hostile The requisite proof to satisfy this element has been summarized as follows: To, prove actual possession,

2017Wicker, 937 So.2d at 994 (¶ 35) (citing Craft v. Thompson, 405 So.2d 128, 130 (Miss. 1981))." A claim of adverse possession cannot begin unless the landowner has actual or constructive knowledge that there is an adverse claim against his property.

2017In Ellison, 820 So.2d at 734-35 (¶ 14), this Court explained that “mere possession is not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of open and notorious possession.” Rather, the “adverse possessor must fly the flag over the land and put the true owner upon notice that his land is held under an adverse claim of ownership.

2012“In most cases, the underlying question is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would-be adverse possessor are sufficient to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Id. at 734 (¶ 14). “[M]ere possession is not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of open and notorious possession.” Id. at 734-35 (¶ 14).

2011“In most cases, the underlying question is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would-be adverse possessor are sufficient to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Cook v. Robinson, 924 So.2d 592, 595 (¶ 12) (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (citation omitted).

2010“In most cases, the underlying question is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would-be adverse possessor are sufficient to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Cook, 924 So.2d at 595 (¶ 12) (citation omitted).

2009It was not necessary for Buford or Soterra to exclude others from the use of the road, but only that there was “an intention to possess and hold land to the exclusion of, and in opposition to, the claims of all others, and the claimant’s conduct must afford an unequivocal indication that he is exercising dominion of a sole owner.” Keener, 912 So.2d at 956-57 (¶ 6) (quoting Lynn v. Soterra, Inc., 802 So.2d 162, 167-68 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2001)) (internal citations omitted). ¶ 22.

2006The definition of exclusivity of possession when dealing with prescription and adverse possession was stated by this Court in Lynn v. Soterra, Inc., 802 So.2d 162, 168 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2001): "The question in the end is whether the possessory acts relied upon by the would be adverse possessor are sufficient to fly his flag over the lands and to put the record title holder upon notice that the lands are held under an adverse claim of ownership." See Keener Properties, L.L.C. v. Wilson, 912 So.2d 954, 956 (¶ 6) (Miss.2005) (adopting above definition).

1999“The owner must know of and acquiesce in the adverse claim, or the use must be so open, notorious, visible, and uninterrupted that knowledge and acquiescence will be presumed.” McIntyre v. Harvey, 158 Miss. 16 , 128 So. 572, 573 (1930).

1999“The owner must know of and acquiesce in the adverse claim, or the use must be so open, notorious, visible, and uninterrupted that knowledge and acquiescence will be presumed.” McIntyre v. Harvey, 158 Miss. 16 , 128 So. 572, 573 (1930).

2017Wicker, 937 So.2d at 994 (¶ 35) (citing Craft v. Thompson, 405 So.2d 128, 130 (Miss. 1981))." A claim of adverse possession cannot begin unless the landowner has actual or constructive knowledge that there is an adverse claim against his property.

2002Peagler v. Measells, 743 So.2d 389 , 390 (Miss.Ct.App. 1999). "[M]ere possession is not sufficient to satisfy the requirements *Page 735 of open and notorious possession." Craft v. Thompson, 405 So.2d 128 , 130 (Miss. 1981); see also People's Realty Dev.

2019“To stake a claim of ownership, the possessor must fly his flag over the property in such a way as to put the actual owner on notice that the property is being held under an adverse claim of ownership.” Scott v. Anderson-Tully Co., 154 So. 3d 910, 916 (¶15) (Miss.

2018The quality, not the quantity, of acts must be considered." Scott v. Anderson-Tully Co. , 154 So.3d 910 , 916 (¶ 15) (Miss.

2011An adverse possessor “must unfurl his flag on the land, and keep it flying, so that the (actual) owner may see, and if he will, that an enemy has invaded his domains, and planted the standard of conquest.” Wicker, 937 So.2d at 994 (¶ 35) (quoting Blan-kinship, 605 So.2d at 820 ). ¶ 20.

2010Stated differently, one who seeks to acquire property by adverse possession “must unfurl his flag on the land, and keep it flying, so that the [actual] owner may see, and if he will, [know] that an enemy has invaded his domains, and planted the standard of conquest.” Blankinship v. Payton, 605 So.2d 817, 820 (Miss.1992). ¶ 12.