ITT Rayonier v. Bell, 112 Wn.2d 754, 774 P.2d 6 

Supreme Court of Washington

1989

Chapter

38-39

Title

Adverse Possession

Page

809

Topic

Good faith no longer constitutes an element of adverse possession

Quick Notes

ITT instituted this action to quiet title their property to eject Arthur Bell.  Bell counterclaimed, but he did not possess his land open and notoriously, his stay was not continuous, he did not exclude others, and therefore did satisfy the element of hostility.

Adverse Possession Requirements, possession must be:

(1)   open and notorious,

(2)   actual and uninterrupted,

(3)   exclusive, and

(4)   hostile.

(5)   Possession of the property with each of the necessary concurrent elements must exist for the statutorily prescribed period of 10 years.

Rule - Presumption of Possession

o         Goes to the holder of legal title

Rule - Burden of proof

o         The party claiming to have adversely possessed the property has the burden of establishing the existence of each element.

HE DID NOT TREAT IT AS HIS OWN!!!

Hostility/claim of right element of adverse possession

o         Requires ONLY that the claimant treat the land as his own as against the world throughout the statutory period.

o         The nature of his possession will be determined solely on the basis of the manner in which he treats the property.

o         His subjective belief regarding his true interest in the land and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess another is irrelevant to this determination.

o         Permission to occupy the land, given by the true title owner to the claimant or his predecessors in interest, will still operate to NEGATE the element of hostility.

o         The traditional presumptions still apply to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this ruling.

o         Good faith no longer constitutes an element of adverse possession.

Book Name

Fundamentals of Modern Property Law: Rabin; Kwall, Kwall.  ISBN:  978-1-59941-053-1.

Issue

o         Whether good faith constitutes as an element of adverse possession?  No,   his subjective belief regarding his true interest in the land and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess another is irrelevant to this determination.

Procedure

Trial

o         Granted summary judgment to ITT.

Appellant

o         Affirmed on alternative grounds of good faith.

Supreme

o         We affirm the Court of Appeals on the basis of Bell's failure to establish exclusive possession, and reverse the Court of Appeals alternative holding that Bell failed to establish a good faith claim to the property

Facts/Cases

Discussion

Reasoning/Key Phrase

Rules/Laws

Pl - ITT Rayonier

Df - Bell

Suit Description

o          ITT Rayonier, Inc. (ITT), plaintiff, instituted this action to quiet title to property situated in Clallam County.

o         In addition, ITT prayed for damages for trespass and for the ejectment of defendant Arthur Bell.

o         Bell answered, alleging ITT was not entitled to judgment in its favor by reason of Bell's adverse possession of the property for a period greater than the statutory period of 10 years.

o         Additionally, Bell counterclaimed against ITT praying for judgment quieting title in Bell.

o         On July 8, 1986, the trial court entered partial summary judgment, quieting title in favor of ITT.

o         The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Facts

o         In 1972, Arthur Bell purchased a houseboat moored near the mouth of the Big River in Swan Bay on Lake Ozette.

o         The property that is the subject of this action is directly adjacent to that moorage and was purchased by ITT in 1947.

ITT Pays Taxes

o         ITT, as owner of record, has paid the property taxes on the land in question continuously since its purchase.

Did not purchase

o         Bell admits that he never purchased any of the property involved in this action.

No Trespassing Signs

o         Additionally, he concedes that he has never maintained any "No Trespassing" signs on the property, nor has he ever denoted any boundary with a fence or any other markers.

o          A very rough approximation of the amount of land in question is one-half of an acre.

Not Continuous, Seasonal

o         Bell testified that he regularly occupies his houseboat in the spring, summer, and fall, and visits only occasionally during the winter months

Bells Testimony

Bells Testimony - Did not act like it was his land.

o         He believed it was the States.

o         He said he would not EXCLUDE others use.

Bells Purchase

o         In 1962, He purchased the houseboat and it had been moored in the same location, except for a 6 week period.

o         Woodshed - 1978

o         Abandoned Sauna - 1973

o         Outhouse that occupied numerous sites - 1972.

Bells absence

o         He was away from the property during the 1974-75, 1975-76, and 1976-77 school years, while he was teaching school in Nanana, Alaska.

o         During the first and third winters, he allowed friends to use the houseboat occasionally.

o         During the 1975-76 school term, he rented the houseboat for $ 30 per month.

o         Bell returned to Lake Ozette each of the three summers, personally occupying his houseboat during those months.

Neighbor Testimony

o         Two families, the Klocks and the Olesens, have co-owned a houseboat for approximately 20 years that floats adjacent to both Bell's houseboat and the disputed property.

Mr. Klock,

o         Used the property in question for digging whole.

o         Used it permissively over the last twenty years.

o         Arthur Bell has never attempted to exclude us from using the property nor has he attempted to claim the property as his own.

Mr. Olsen

o         Swore to an identical statement.

Gerald Schaefer (ITT) Testimony

o         An employee of ITT, stated in his sworn affidavit that ITT owns 383,000 acres in eight counties in Washington state.

o         Often ITT is absent from its land for long periods of time.

o         After property has been logged and planted, it does not visit the land for 15 years.

Analysis

Adverse Possession Requirements, possession must be:

(1)   open and notorious,

(2)   actual and uninterrupted,

(3)   exclusive, and

(4)   hostile.

(5)   Possession of the property with each of the necessary concurrent elements must exist for the statutorily prescribed period of 10 years.

Rule - Presumption of Possession

o         Goes to the holder of legal title

Rule - Burden of proof

o         The party claiming to have adversely possessed the property has the burden of establishing the existence of each element.

Good Faith

Court of Appeals

o         Used the alternative grounds of a good faith requirement in affirmed the trial courts summary judgment.

o         Another element of adverse possession is that the party seeking to acquire title to land by adverse possession must possess the land under a good faith claim of right.

Bell concedes

o         At No time prior to the time he claims his possession of the property ripened into title.

o         At no time did he believe that he had title to this property or any claim of right to it.

Court of Appeals - Bell did not raise genuine issue

o         Holding in this case, as a matter of law, that Bell did not raise a genuine issue of fact on the question of his good faith claim of right to the property is, in our judgment, consistent with Chaplin.

Chaplin v. Sanders - Subjective belief is irrelevant

o         Held that the adverse possessor's "subjective belief whether the land possessed is or is not his own and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess another are irrelevant to a finding of hostility."

Court of Appeals - Does not encourage squatting.

o         "to conclude [that good faith WAS NOT an element of adverse possession] . . . we would be encouraging . . . 'squatting.'"

Courts Opinion  on Chaplin v. Sanders

Hostility/claim of right element of adverse possession

o         Requires ONLY that the claimant treat the land as his own as against the world throughout the statutory period.

o         The nature of his possession will be determined solely on the basis of the manner in which he treats the property.

o         His subjective belief regarding his true interest in the land and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess another is irrelevant to this determination.

o         Permission to occupy the land, given by the true title owner to the claimant or his predecessors in interest, will still operate to NEGATE the element of hostility.

o         The traditional presumptions still apply to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this ruling.

o         Good faith no longer constitutes an element of adverse possession!!!

Court - Holding

o         We affirm the Court of Appeals on the basis of Bell's failure to establish exclusive possession, and reverse the Court of Appeals alternative holding that Bell failed to establish a good faith claim to the property.

Rules

Adverse Possession Requirements, possession must be:

(1)   open and notorious,

(2)   actual and uninterrupted,

(3)   exclusive, and

(4)   hostile.

(5)   Possession of the property with each of the necessary concurrent elements must exist for the statutorily prescribed period of 10 years.

Rule - Presumption of Possession

o         Goes to the holder of legal title

Rule - Burden of proof

o         The party claiming to have adversely possessed the property has the burden of establishing the existence of each element.

Hostility/claim of right element of adverse possession

o         Requires ONLY that the claimant treat the land as his own as against the world throughout the statutory period.

o         The nature of his possession will be determined solely on the basis of the manner in which he treats the property.

o         His subjective belief regarding his true interest in the land and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess another is irrelevant to this determination.

o         Permission to occupy the land, given by the true title owner to the claimant or his predecessors in interest, will still operate to NEGATE the element of hostility.

o         The traditional presumptions still apply to the extent that they are not inconsistent with this ruling.

o         Good faith no longer constitutes an element of adverse possession.

Class Notes