Posey v. Owens

Citations: 504 So. 2d 299; 1986 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 1572Docket: Civ. 5487

Court: Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama; December 2, 1986; Alabama; State Appellate Court

Lead Opinion SummaryLead Opinion Original

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

An adverse possession case was brought before the court involving a property dispute between Rodney T. Posey and Billy Anthony Owens. On September 4, 1980, Emma Rudolph conveyed 33.33 acres of land in Lowndes County, Alabama, to Posey for $10,000. Posey believed his purchase included land bordering Greenville Road but later discovered an additional 20 acres lay between his purchased property and the road. This 20 acres was originally part of the Haynes-McCord plantation, owned by Owens.

After Posey’s purchase, Owens sought to amend his deed from his vendor, Ms. Furniss Gordon Storrs, to include the disputed 20 acres. Following this, Posey and Rudolph filed a quiet title action against Owens, with Posey later amending his complaint to seek reformation of his deed from Rudolph to include the disputed property or compensation for improvements made. 

During the trial on January 16, 1986, Posey attempted to establish that Rudolph had intended to convey the 20 acres to him and that she had acquired it through adverse possession. The court found evidence indicated the property had belonged to Owens since at least 1895, ruling that Rudolph had not established adverse possession and denying Posey's request for deed reformation. The court awarded Posey $1,000 for his improvements. Posey appealed, raising four points of contention: the trial court's adverse possession ruling, the awarded amount for improvements, an alleged breach of warranty by Rudolph regarding his title, and the exclusion of testimony from Rudolph's attorneys related to the sale. Posey argued that the ruling against his adverse possession claim was contrary to the weight of the evidence.

In cases tried without a jury, there is a presumption that the trial court's findings are correct, and its judgment will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous, lacks evidence, or is unjust. Alabama appellate courts typically uphold trial court judgments in adverse possession disputes that hinge on factual disagreements. 

In this case, the disputed twenty acres was once part of the Haynes-McCord plantation, purchased by Defendant Owens in 1977. Plaintiff Posey claims title through adverse possession, asserting that Ms. Rudolph used the property for cattle raising for many years. However, evidence shows that other landowners also grazed cattle on the property, including Mr. Middleton from 1958 to 1974, and that the Rudolphs were not observed using the land. Alabama law recognizes two types of adverse possession, and Posey claims his title through prescription, which requires actual, exclusive, open, notorious, and hostile possession for at least twenty years. The evidence indicates that the land was used collectively by multiple landowners, undermining Posey’s claim of exclusive possession.

Posey's second claim concerns the trial court awarding only $1,000 for improvements made to the disputed land, despite evidence of expenditures between $3,500 and $6,000 for clearing and building a pond. The court's award was not deemed against the great weight of the evidence. Posey's third contention, regarding a breach of warranty claim against Ms. Rudolph, lacked supporting authority and was therefore not considered. 

Lastly, Posey argued against the trial court's refusal to allow testimony from two attorneys who represented Ms. Rudolph, claiming their testimony was relevant to his breach of warranty claim. This issue was rendered moot due to the previous ruling on the breach of warranty claim. Ultimately, the court found no grounds to overturn the trial court's decisions regarding Posey's adverse possession claim or the award for improvements, leading to the affirmation of the judgment.