Murray v. Stone

The appellee introduced evidence showing that she continuously and exclusively maintained and used the land in question for more than 20 years with a claim of right.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Plaintiff, Fannie Stone, and defendants, the Murrays, are adjoining landowners. The Murrays received a deed to their property in 1978 from Sarah Stoner,1 Audrey Murray’s mother. Stone brought this prescriptive title action against the Murrays to establish title to two tracts of land ostensibly owned by the Murrays.2 Stone claims she purchased one of the tracts from Sarah Stoner, her sister-in-law, in the 1960′s, but was never given a deed. Stone introduced evidence that she exclusively used and occupied both the tracts for more than 20 years by mowing, maintaining, fencing, and placing old cars, boats, a chicken coop, basketball goals, and a driveway on them. She also demonstrated that during that time the parties adhered to a natural boundary line which separated the Murrays’ property from the two tracts. In this regard, Stone showed that when it came to placing debris on their property, the Murrays never crossed the natural boundary to use the tracts in question. The jury found in favor of Stone on her claim for adverse possession and prescription and awarded her both tracts of land. Judgment was entered accordingly and the Murrays appeal.

1. The burden of establishing prescriptive title lies on the plaintiff. Yerbey v. Chandler , 194 Ga. 263 1 21 SE2d 636 1942. Here, Stone introduced evidence demonstrating that she continuously and exclusively maintained and used the land in question for more than 20 years accompanied by a claim of right. This evidence was sufficient to carry Stone’s burden and support the jury’s conclusion that Stone established prescriptive title by adverse possession. OCGA § § 44-5-161, 44-5-163. See also C & S Nat. Bank v. Haskins , 254 Ga. 131, 135 1 327 SE2d 192 1985 evidence must be construed to uphold a verdict if there is any evidence to support it. Although a neighboring landowner testified that over the years he saw both plaintiff and the Murrays mowing the property, the credibility of that witness and the weight to be accorded his testimony were matters for the jury to resolve. OCGA § 24-9-80.

Murray v. Stone

The appellee introduced evidence showing that she continuously and exclusively maintained and used the land in question for more than 20 years with a claim of right.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report