Case Studies

Back

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails at the Appellate Division in Adverse Possession Case of First Impression


In a case of first impression in the Second Department involving the law of adverse possession, the Appellate Division has ruled that pursuant to the amendment to Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law §543, de minimus non-structural encroachments are, as a matter of law, deemed permissive and non-adverse and cannot support a claim for adverse possession.

In Hartman v. Goldman, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully represented the Goldman family before the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division. The Plaintiffs, adjacent property owners, claimed that they were entitled to adversely possess or own a strip of land which was on the Goldman’s’ property.

Plaintiffs claimed that they relied on a survey obtained in 1987 when they bought their property.  They argued that for more than twenty years they planted new foliage and shrubbery, landscaped the strip, mowed the lawn, and installed lights thereon. Although they later found that the survey was incorrect, they nonetheless maintained that they satisfied the elements necessary to obtain the strip by adverse possession.

The Appellate Division, however, rejected these claims.

It explained that while prior to the new law being enacted, “the existence of the kinds of non-structural encroachments and maintenance listed in RPAPL 543 could be considered in determining whether the plaintiff had shown that he or she usually cultivated, improved, or substantially enclosed the land…”

In other words, under the previous adverse possession law, our adversary had a good chance of winning their case.  But since our adversary decided to apply the new law to the facts of the case in its pleadings and motion, the court would not disturb this decision and would apply the new law for the first time in a Second Department case.

However, under the “plain terms” of the new law, “plaintiffs’ planting of foliage and shrubbery, and landscaping and lawn maintenance are de minimis and deemed permissive and non-adverse,” and cannot be used to claim the Goldman’s land.

In addition, the court found that the new law (RPAPL 543) also applied to the driveway lights. As a result, plaintiffs’ claims alleging that they obtained the disputed strip by adverse possession were dismissed in total.

Adam Leitman Bailey prevented the Goldman’s property from being absconded and prevailed in all aspects of the litigation.

Adam Leitman Bailey argued the case before the State Supreme Court and Jeffrey R. Metz argued the Appeal in front of the Appellate Division. John M. Desiderio drafted a substantial portion of the briefs.

Related Content

With “Professionalism, Support, and Persistence”, ALBPC Works Hard to Keep Tax Benefits for Client “It is so nice to work with people who can become part of your work family. You are an amazing attorney, and always go above and beyond…” “Tears in my eyes as I thank God for you and your staff.” “I’ve learned so much and gained knowledge with a desire to work in the real estate department.” “We are finally at the point in time when I can say thank you so much for your phenomenal work. Your faith in this case was wise and the outcome matches.” Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Successfully Defends Foreclosing Plaintiff’s Action against Motions to Vacate and Dismiss Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Standing Defense and Wins Summary Judgment for Foreclosing Plaintiff ALBPC Obtains Condo Deposit Refunds for Two Clients Totaling Over $10 Million, Including Interest Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Assists with Drafting the Foreclosure Motion Templates Promulgated for Use By Administrative Order 356/17 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Provides Free Closings For All Employees ALBPC Prevails in a Complex Non-Primary Residence Case for 100-year-old Woman, Pro Bono ALBPC Prevails in a Complex Non-Primary Residence Case for 100-year-old Woman, Pro Bono ALBPC Prevails in a Complex Non-Primary Residence Case for 100-year-old Woman, Pro Bono Handling and Storing Hazardous Materials Brokers Win $1.2M In Six-Year-Long Commission Battle Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Prevails at Traverse Hearing, Defeats Borrower’s Motion to Vacate and Dismiss, and Wins Judgment for Lender (Part I) Hartman v Goldman Published Decision Adam Leitman Bailey Presents at New York State Bar Association Advanced Real Estate Topics: “Advice from a Litigator” Christopher Halligan Speaks to the New York State Bar Association on Jury Trials in Landlord – Tenant Proceedings Adam Leitman Bailey Lectures for New York State Bar Association on Easements, Adverse Possession and Arcane Laws to Overcoming Building Obstacles Adam Leitman Bailey Guest Lecturer at New York Law School’s Landlord-Tenant Class NYSBA – Removing Real Estate Development Obstacles: Zoning, Restrictive Covenants, Easements, Adverse Possession and Boundary Disputes

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

NEW YORK REAL ESTATE ATTORNEYS