ONE L LAW SOURCE: Civil Procedure | Contracts | Criminal Law | Property | Torts | LAWAR | 1LLS Home

Heading: Van Valkenburg v. Lutz, 304 N.Y. 95, (1952) p120.

Topic: adverse possesion

Facts: The Lutz family owned two lots in Yonkers since 1912. In 1920 they built several buildings on the property. Instead of climbing the steep hill on the street side of their property they began to use a shortcut through the property behind theirs. That property was unoccupied, and eventually the Lutzs began to remove the brush and use it for farming. In 1928 Mr. Lutz lost his job and grew crops on the property full time which he sold in order to make a living. In 1947 the Van Valkenburghs bought the property in a foreclosure sale. They told Mr. Lutz to clear the property. Lutz claimed a right to use the travel way to reach his property. Judgement was in Lutz’s favor. In 1950 Mr. Lutz died, leaving all his property to his wife. Before he died he filed suit in which he alleged an acquired title to what was now Van Valkenburghs’ property.

Procedure: Judgement for adverse possession was entered in favor of Mr. Lutz by the trial court. The Appellate Division affirmed. This court reversed (highest NY court: Court of Appeals).

Issue: Did the use of the land by the Lutz family constitute adverse possession?

Rule:

Holding: Proofs fail to establish actual occupation for such time or in such manner as to establish title.

Rationale: No proof property was protected by a substantial enclosure. No proof was improved. The small building, chicken coop, and accident of building a garage a few inches over the property line are not evidence of improvement. The fact that Lutz conceded the land during easement proceedings does not help his case. A garden on the property is not cultivation.

Policy/Notes: proof of adverse possession: 1) property must have been protected by a substantial enclosure; or 2) the property must have been cultivated or improved.

dissent: property was cleared by Mr. Lutz, he developed and worked a truck farm continuously until his death. Also raised chickens, planted fruit trees, and built a dwelling. This is enough to establish adverse possession. It does not matter that Lutz admitted knowing the property was not his. The neighborhood regarded it as his, and he used it as his own for over 20 years.