From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simpson v. Chien Yuan Kao

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

December 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Gurahian, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The proof that the defendants planted and cultivated a few trees on the plaintiff's property near the boundary line between their property and the plaintiff's property is insufficient to establish adverse possession by usually cultivating or improving the property in dispute (see, RPAPL 522; Van Valkenburgh v Lutz, 304 N.Y. 95; City of Tonawanda v Ellicott Cr. Homeowners Assn., 86 A.D.2d 118). Mangano, P.J., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Simpson v. Chien Yuan Kao

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 29, 1995
222 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Simpson v. Chien Yuan Kao

Case Details

Full title:ABBY R. SIMPSON, Respondent, v. CHIEN YUAN KAO et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 29, 1995

Citations

222 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
636 N.Y.S.2d 70

Citing Cases

Stickler v. Halevy

enough in circumstances where the land would be better suited to a more intensive economic use. See, e.g.,…

Seisser v. Eglin

At the tree line was a mowed lawn, which the plaintiffs contend was maintained by them and their predecessors…