Paul Risley et al. v. Valerie Andrews (2015)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE Motion for Summary Judgment No. 108

The plaintiffs, Paul and Geraldine Risley, own property in the town of Lebanon, Connecticut that abuts property owned by the defendant, Valerie Andrews.  The plaintiffs allege that Ms. Andrews commissioned and recorded a survey of her property and that the survey includes property owned by the plaintiffs through adverse possession.  The Andrews' parcel is a 40–acre parcel and it is unclear if the plaintiffs' claim for adverse possession relates to the entire parcel or a portion thereof.

The defendant, Valerie Andrews, in her answer and counterclaim denies the allegations of the plaintiffs' complaint and further seeks in her counterclaim to quiet title to the property as is described in the boundary survey prepared for Valerie Andrews and dated March 25, 2013.

The second count of the complaint sounds in trespass and alleges that the plaintiffs have knowingly and intentionally entered onto the defendant's property, hunted on the property and farmed on the property.

The defendant has filed this motion for summary judgment on the complaint of the plaintiffs and the first count of her counterclaim.  She supports her motion for summary judgment by reference to the survey as well as the deeds by which she acquired title to her property and the plaintiffs acquired title to their property.  The deeds to the property do not contain a metes and bound descriptions of the property but rely upon descriptions of abutters and acreage.

The plaintiffs aver that the plaintiffs and their family have been using and farming a portion of the land identified as the defendant's on the survey for more than 15 years.  No additional expert evidence has been provided.  The defendant argues that the plaintiffs have not supported their claims by any expert testimony and cannot oppose the summary judgment motion based solely upon their own affidavit.

The defendant has demonstrated through the offering of a survey of her property a clear and precise delineation as to the acreage that she claims to own.  This survey is undoubtedly strong evidence to establish an interpretation of the deeds based upon an examination of the findings on the ground identified by the surveyor.  The survey, however, does not foreclose a claim of adverse possession which might or might not be refuted by an actual survey.  In fact claims of adverse possession can arise even when there is clearly delineated metes and bounds description or a survey but where there has been an open, adverse and notorious use of property for more than 15 years.  While the plaintiffs' support for their case is weak, it is sufficient to cause the court to find that there is a genuine issue of material fact that requires the denial of the motion for summary judgment.

Cosgrove, J.

Cosgrove, Emmet L., J.