Issue: Whether or not the Norris family can establish ownership of Grant's Forest through adverse possession against Hughie Grant. Rule: The State of Bliss has a 15-year statute of limitations for ejectment actions, which allows someone to acquire ownership of real property by possessing it continuously for a specific period under specific conditions. To establish adverse possession, the Norris family must prove the following elements: 1. Uninterrupted: Without interruption, they must have continued to possess the land for the statutory period (15 years). 2. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Hostile Possession: Their possession must be without permission or consent of the actual owner (Hughie). 3. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Actual…show more content… This satisfies the hostility requirement. In the case of Manzanillo v. Gorski (1969), the court abolished the "hostile intent" requirement for adverse possession in the state, making it sufficient for the possessor to demonstrate the other elements – open, notorious, and continuous use – for the statutory period. The court reasoned that requiring malice or ill-will towards the true owner was unnecessary and created impractical difficulties in proving intent. The family established a meeting spot with logs for seating and a big metal fire ring and built a site for a small house that had been laid to demonstrate control over the property and was open and notorious, their annual hunting expeditions with friends were likely noticeable. Their presence on the land wouldn't be easily hidden. the hunting platforms, and a meeting area, all visible signs of their use. They didn't share the land with other hunters and tried to avoid hikers while hunting. Hughie could argue that, though the Norris family never obtained permission to use the land, but lacked the intent to possess the land, they only used the
