Laserfiche WebLink
<br />200709070 <br /> <br />land between the parties homes. The plaintiff has legal title to the disputed property, but <br /> <br />Hall and his predecessors have been in the possession of the disputed property for many <br /> <br />years. Plaintiff claims that defendant has trespassed on his property and as a result, <br /> <br />requests a permanent injunction against Hall and damages for that trespass. Hall has filed <br /> <br />a Motion for Summary Judgment alleging that plaintiff s complaint should be dismissed <br /> <br />as a matter of law and defendant should be granted a summary judgment on his <br /> <br />counterclaim as a matter of law. <br /> <br />STANDARD OF REVIEW <br /> <br />Summary judgment is proper when the pleadings and evidence admitted disclose <br /> <br />that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact or as to the ultimate inferences that <br /> <br />may be drawn from those facts, and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a <br /> <br />matter oflaw. Swanson v. Petak, 268 Neb. 265 (2004). <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />The Supreme Court in Nye v. Fire Group Partnership, 265 Neb. 438 (2003), <br /> <br />outlined the requirements for a claim of adverse possession: <br /> <br />A party claiming title through adverse possession must prove <br />by a preponderance of the evidence that the adverse possessor <br />has been in: (1) actual, (2) continuous, (3) exclusive, (4) <br />notorious, and (5) adverse possession under a claim of <br />ownership for the statutory period of 10 years. <br /> <br />In the instant case, the plaintiff purchased his property in 1997 and in 1999 Hall <br /> <br />bought his property. It is undisputed that for the period of time from when Hall <br /> <br />2 <br />