12 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1891–2024 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Van Gorder v. Masterplanned, Inc.green2 sentences2024Where the possessor "concedes to the owner that title rests with the owner, the owner is no longer on notice of an adverse claim against his or her land and the element of hostility is negated" ( Salzberg v Sena , 204 AD3d at 857 [citation omitted]; see Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc. , 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 ["acknowledgement during the statutory 10-year period that actual ownership of the property rested with defendant . . . would negate an essential element of plaintiffs' adverse possession claim"]). 2022Thus, where the possessor, for example, seeks "permission for use from the record owner" ( Estate of Becker v Murtagh , 19 NY3d at 82 [internal quotation marks omitted]), offers to purchase the disputed property from the owner ( see Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d at 1004-1005 ), or orally concedes to the owner that title rests with the owner ( see Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc. , 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 , revg 161 AD2d 920 ), the owner is no longer on notice of an adverse claim against his or her land and the element of hostility is negated. | 2 | 3 |
Larsen v. Hansongreen2 sentences2024Under pre-amendment law, the alleged adverse possessor's "overt acknowledgment of title in another negates the element of hostility because it undermines notice to the owner that another is possessing the land under claim of title" ( Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d 1003, 1004 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Salzberg v Sena , 204 AD3d at 857 ). 2022"To be distinguished from the possessor's subjective knowledge that another holds title, the possessor's overt acknowledgment of title in another negates the element of hostility because it undermines notice to the owner that another is possessing the land under claim of title" ( Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d 1003, 1004 [internal quotation marks omitted]). | 2 | 2 |
Salzberg v. Senagreen2 sentences2024Under pre-amendment law, the alleged adverse possessor's "overt acknowledgment of title in another negates the element of hostility because it undermines notice to the owner that another is possessing the land under claim of title" ( Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d 1003, 1004 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Salzberg v Sena , 204 AD3d at 857 ). 2024Where the possessor "concedes to the owner that title rests with the owner, the owner is no longer on notice of an adverse claim against his or her land and the element of hostility is negated" ( Salzberg v Sena , 204 AD3d at 857 [citation omitted]; see Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc. , 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 ["acknowledgement during the statutory 10-year period that actual ownership of the property rested with defendant . . . would negate an essential element of plaintiffs' adverse possession claim"]). | 1 | 1 |
Becker v. Murtaghgreen1 sentence2022Thus, where the possessor, for example, seeks "permission for use from the record owner" ( Estate of Becker v Murtagh , 19 NY3d at 82 [internal quotation marks omitted]), offers to purchase the disputed property from the owner ( see Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d at 1004-1005 ), or orally concedes to the owner that title rests with the owner ( see Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc. , 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 , revg 161 AD2d 920 ), the owner is no longer on notice of an adverse claim against his or her land and the element of hostility is negated. | 1 | 1 |
Westbrook v. WR Activities-Cabrera Marketsgreen2 sentences2021Moreover, a landowner or occupier "has a duty to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents which might foreseeably occur as the result of dangerous terrain on its property by posting warning signs or otherwise neutralizing dangerous conditions" ( Cohen v State of New York , 50 AD3d 1234, 1235 [3rd Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 713 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to 2021Moreover, a landowner or occupier "has a duty to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents which might foreseeably occur as the result of dangerous terrain on its property by posting warning signs or otherwise neutralizing dangerous conditions" ( Cohen v State of New York , 50 AD3d 1234, 1235 [3rd Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 713 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to | 1 | 1 |
Garrido v. City of New Yorkgreen1 sentence2021Moreover, a landowner or occupier "has a duty to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents which might foreseeably occur as the result of dangerous terrain on its property by posting warning signs or otherwise neutralizing dangerous conditions" ( Cohen v State of New York , 50 AD3d 1234, 1235 [3rd Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 713 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to | 1 | 1 |
Cohen v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Moreover, a landowner or occupier "has a duty to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents which might foreseeably occur as the result of dangerous terrain on its property by posting warning signs or otherwise neutralizing dangerous conditions" ( Cohen v State of New York , 50 AD3d 1234, 1235 [3rd Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 713 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to | 1 | 1 |
Esposito v. Stacklergreen1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 1 |
Manhattan School of Music v. Solowgreen1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 1 |
Garrett v. Holcombgreen1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 1 |
Guariglia v. Blima Homes, Inc.green1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 1 |
Albright v. Beesimergreen1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Basso v. Miller
green
2 sentences2021While [plaintiff's] status is no longer [*3]determinative, considerations of who plaintiff is and what [his or her] purpose is upon the land are factors which, if known, may be included in arriving at what would be reasonable care under the circumstances" ( id. ). 1982Although we now have only one standard of care, consideration of “who plaintiff is and what his purpose is upon the land are factors” in determining “what would be reasonable care under the circumstances.” (Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241 .) Here we have a nine-year-old camper and his peers obviously needing supervision. | 3 | 1978–2021 |
City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of NY
green
2 sentences2024Moreover, although our dissenting colleague concludes that such concerns are "pure speculation," we also may consider the potential future consequences of the land claim at issue, as the United States Supreme Court did in City of Sherrill v Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. ( see id. [discussing the potential harmful consequences that could result in the future if the Oneida Nation's claim of sovereignty over the land was recognized, including the potential of future litigation to free the land of local zoning and other regulatory control]). 2024If the Nation is permitted to assert sovereign authority over the subject property for purposes of these structures, little would prevent the Nation from asserting full sovereign authority over the subject property or even requiring that the portion of the highway that goes through the subject property be rerouted ( see id. ; Canadian St. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Van Gorder v. Master-planned, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2022Thus, where the possessor, for example, seeks "permission for use from the record owner" ( Estate of Becker v Murtagh , 19 NY3d at 82 [internal quotation marks omitted]), offers to purchase the disputed property from the owner ( see Larsen v Hanson , 58 AD3d at 1004-1005 ), or orally concedes to the owner that title rests with the owner ( see Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc. , 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 , revg 161 AD2d 920 ), the owner is no longer on notice of an adverse claim against his or her land and the element of hostility is negated. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Salvador v. New York Botanical Garden
green
1 sentence2021Moreover, a landowner or occupier "has a duty to take reasonable precautions to prevent accidents which might foreseeably occur as the result of dangerous terrain on its property by posting warning signs or otherwise neutralizing dangerous conditions" ( Cohen v State of New York , 50 AD3d 1234, 1235 [3rd Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 713 [2008] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "[E]ven if a hazard qualifies as 'open and obvious' as a matter of law, that characteristic merely eliminates the property owner's duty to warn of the hazard, but does not eliminate the broader duty to | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Moore v. County of Clinton
green
1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Walling v. Przybylo
green
1 sentence2009To be distinguished from the possessor’s subjective knowledge that another holds title, the “possessor’s overt acknowledgment of title in another” negates the element of hostility because it undermines notice to the owner that another is possessing the land under claim of title (Walling v Przybylo, 24 AD 3d at 4 ). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Gordon v. Adenbaum
green
1 sentence2009A possessor’s offer to purchase land prior to the expiration of the statutory 10-year period is an overt acknowledgment of another’s title sufficient to defeat the element of hostility necessary to an adverse possession claim (see Albright v Beesimer, 288 AD2d 577, 579 [2001]; Garrett v Holcomb, 215 AD2d 884, 885-886 [1995]; Esposito v Stockler, 160 AD2d 1154, 1155 [1990]; see also Van Gorder v Masterplanned, Inc., 78 NY2d 1106, 1107-1108 [1991]; Guariglia v Blima Homes, 224 AD2d 388, 389 [1996], affd 89 NY2d 851 [1996]; Manhattan School of Music v Solow, 175 AD2d 106, 107 [1991], lv dismissed | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Lincoln First Bank v. Siegel
green
1 sentence1978Conceding the validity of defendant’s argument that plaintiff has the burden of proving the marketability of title (see 1 Warren’s Weed, New York Real Property, Adverse Possession, §§ 11.05, 17.01, 18.01-18.09) the plaintiff’s sworn and unrebutted statements in his pleadings and motion papers are sufficient to meet that burden (see Lincoln First Bank of Rochester v Siegel, 60 AD2d 270 ). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
In re City of New York
neutral
1 sentence1930(Matter of City of New York [Public Beach], 230 App. Div. 299 .) Present—-Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Kinnier v. . Rogers
neutral
1 sentence1922Kinnier v. Rogers, 42 N. Y. 531 . | 1 | 1922–1922 |
Marsh v. . City of Brooklyn
green
1 sentence1899Under the rule declared in Marsh v. The City of Brooklyn ( 59 N. Y. 280 ), the owner of the land could not maintain an action to set aside such a tax sale; therefore, much less the plaintiff, whose only interest in the land is a claim against it for taxes. | 1 | 1899–1899 |
Read v. . Williams
green
1 sentence1891S. 734, § 94; Read v. Williams, 125 N. Y. 560 .) As this will discloses no purpose to be accomplished, nor any person or class of persons to be benefited by the alienation of the land under the clause last quoted, a valid power in -trust was not created by it. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.