Howard v. Kunto

Facts

The dispute involved a row of summer beach homes on the shore of Hood Canal. At least as long ago as 1932, McCall lived in the house the Kuntos later occupied. His deed described a 50-foot parcel, but it described the adjacent lot directly west of the lot where his house stood. Several owners to the west were in the same position. Since 1946, several conveyances used the same deed description and each passed possession to the next occupant. The Millers, the Kuntos' immediate predecessors, had a survey done to build a dock. It indicated that the deed description and the occupation matched. They built the dock and other improvements. The houses were used as summer recreational retreats. The Kuntos took possession under a deed from the Millers in 1959. In 1960 the Howards, who held land east of the Kuntos, planned to convey a half interest to the Yearlys and had the area surveyed. Their surveyor found that, according to the government survey, deeds and occupancy did not coincide. The Howards held record title to the land the Moyers occupied, and the Moyers held record title to the land the Kuntos occupied. In April 1960 the Howards got the Moyers' record title to the Kunto land in exchange for the land under the Moyers' house. No Moyer or predecessor had ever claimed the land the Kuntos and their predecessors possessed.

Issues

1. Is a claim of adverse possession defeated because the physical use of the property is limited to summer occupancy?
2. May a buyer who receives record title to one tract, believing it is a neighboring tract he occupies, add to his own the periods of possession of the neighboring tract by his immediate predecessors, who also had record title to the first tract, to establish adverse possession of it?

Holding

Summer-only occupancy of a summer beach home for more than the 10-year period, with the improvements remaining, was uninterrupted possession. Where successive purchasers took record title to one tract believing they were buying the adjoining tract, and possession of that tract was transferred and occupied in a continuous manner for more than 10 years by successive occupants, privity was sufficient to permit tacking and establish adverse possession as a matter of law.