Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.070 (2026)

Limitation where equitable title to land emanates from government

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  516.070.  Limitation where equitable title to land emanates from government. — Whenever any real estate, the equitable title to which shall have emanated from the government more than ten years, shall thereafter, on any date, be in the lawful possession of any person, and which shall or might be claimed by another, and which shall not at such date have been in possession of the said person claiming or who might claim the same, or of anyone under whom he claims or might claim, for thirty consecutive years, and on which neither the said person claiming or who might claim the same nor those under whom he claims or might claim has paid any taxes for all that period of time, the said person claiming or who might claim such real estate shall, within one year from said date, bring his action to recover the same, and in default thereof he shall be forever barred, and his right and title shall, ipso facto, vest in such possessor; provided, however, that in all cases such action may be brought at any time within one year from the date at which this section takes effect and goes into force.

­­--------

(RSMo 1939 § 1008)

Prior revisions: 1929 § 856; 1919 § 1311; 1909 § 1884

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1955–2020 · leading case: Dambach v. James, 587 S.W.2d 640 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979).
Dambach v. James, 587 S.W.2d 640 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “010 and § 516.070 RSMo 1969. While it was undisputed at the trial that defendants were exercising dominion over at least a portion of the property in question, the length of time of the adverse possession was seriously contested.”
Mcclain Ex Rel. Rutledge v. Carpio, 338 S.W.3d 361 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “120; and finally, Plaintiffs’ third point asserting the tolling provisions of section 516.070. 9 I. The Appeal is not Moot Defendants argue that the finality of the judgment as to defendants C.”
La Grange Reorganized Sch. Dist. No. R-VI v. Smith, 312 S.W.2d 135 (Mo. 1958). · cites it 2× “§ 516.070), the parties appear to have assumed the fact, perhaps it is a permissible inference from the fact of the appellant’s title as far back as 1880.”
Miller v. Medley, 281 S.W.2d 797 (Mo. 1955). · cites it 4× “§ 516.070, that there was no privity between McElyea and Miller, and that no right of possession was transferred so as to warrant Miller’s tacking McElyea’s claimed possession to his possession.”
Wilton Boat Club v. Hazell, 502 S.W.2d 273 (Mo. 1973). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs alleged “that title to said real estate has vested in them and those under whom they claim by limitations under the provisions of § 516.070, RSMo 1959 [V.A.M.S.], and other sections thereof; that plaintiffs and those under whom they claim title have been in hostile,…”
Brewer v. United States, 562 F. Supp. 128 (E.D. Mo. 1983). · cites it 2× “It is in this period, by operation of Section 516.070, Mo.Rev. Stat. (1969) that plaintiff acquired title to the Brewer tract.”
Brown v. Wilkinson, 495 S.W.2d 678 (Mo. Ct. App. 1973). “Count I seeks to quiet title to the five acres under § 516.070 against the Wilsons, the record owners.”
Michael a. Predovic, Marilyn M. Predovic, Paul R. Etheridge & Elizabeth a. Etheridge v. The Empire Dist. Elec. Co., & Chuck Pennel, Assessor (Mo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 10× “Appellants’ Point 2 (§ 516.070) Although Appellants raise six points, we need address only the second and Appellants’ pleas of ownership under RSMo § 516.”
Michael a. Predovic, Marilyn M. Predovic, Paul R. Etheridge & Elizabeth a. Etheridge v. The Empire Dist. Elec. Co., & Chuck Pennel, Assessor (Mo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 10× “Appellants’ Point 2 (§ 516.070) Although Appellants raise six points, we need address only the second and Appellants’ pleas of ownership under RSMo § 516.”
Taneycomo Lakefront Resort & Rv Park, LLC v. Empire Dist. Elec. Co. (Mo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 6× “” To quote Empire further: This case and Predovic raised identical claims of adverse possession based on the alleged nonpayment of property taxes for thirty years under § 516.070, RSMo. The same Empire tax parcel 1A third action, filed by the Ethridges, was consolidated with the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.