Re: Brain Trauma Injury

More | Report Post

Well, Mikey, I am sure you know more than I do about what could not
possibly be a crime or a tort in every jurisdiction in the US.

However, your arrogant tone inspired me to start my Bar Prep early,
so let's make believe this was a Bar Exam question.

This Board sends long emails to the administrator to review.
Therefore, my response to you will be in multiple segments.

1. Adverse Possession or Prescriptive Easement?

Here, the facts state that this was "a trail that has been used
for years."

All States recognize advers possession, though with different
statutory periods. The elements for obtaining title by adverse
possession are that the Adverse Possessor's [AP's] possession must
be "open, notorious and visible" (element met here), the possession
must be "hostile," i.e., without the owner’s consent (element met
here), must be continuous (where ability to use in the manner AP is
using it, seasonal continuous use satisfies this element); and must
be for at least the length of the statutory period (element met
depending on how many years AP used the trail, and how many years
in the jurisdiction's statutory period). Note also that "tacking"
permits adding the periods of use of one AP who follows another AP,
to get the continuous use satisfied, so that if P only used the
trail this year, but another AP used it last year, etc., the
element is satisfied.

Therefore, it is conceivable that P, and not the farmer, has legal
title to the trail, in which case it would be Farmer, and not P,
who is trespassing.

Even if adverse possession cannot be established, then P may have
gained an easement by prescription (EBP). The elements for EBP are
similar to those of adverse possession, and depending on the
statutory period in the jurisdiction, may well have been met. In
my jurisdiction, the statutory period is only seven (7) years, and
under the stipulated facts, this condition may well have been met.

Assuming that a prescriptive easement (or adverse possession) can
be established, and even if no injury occurred, and even if Farmer
did not intend his acts to cause serious bodily injury to P, or
reasonably know that his acts would cause serious bodily injury to
P, farmer was not legally entitled to put the boxes across the
trail.

Mikey, is your understanding of adverse possession and prescriptive
easements different from mine and, if so, how?

To be continued ...