[¶19.] "Proof of the individual elements of adverse possession present questions of fact for the [trier of fact], while the ultimate conclusion of whether they are sufficient to constitute adverse possession is a question of law." Healy Ranch P'ship v. Mines, 2022 S.D. 44, ¶ 46, 978 N.W.2d 768, 781 (alteration in original) (quoting Gangle v. Spiry, 2018 S.D. 55, ¶ 11, 916 N.W.2d 119, 123). "Therefore, the circuit court's factual findings are reviewed for clear error, and its legal conclusions are reviewed de novo." Underhill v. Mattson, 2016 S.D. 69, ¶ 9, 886 N.W.2d 348, 352.
"We have condensed this statute into three textual elements: '(1) claim and color of title made in good faith, (2) ten successive years in possession, and (3) payment of all taxes legally assessed.'" Healy Ranch P'ship v. Mines, 2022 S.D. 44, ¶ 48, 978 N.W.2d 768, 781 (quoting Ashby v. Oolman, 2008 S.D. 26, ¶ 12, 748 N.W.2d 132, 135). Adverse possession under SDCL 15-3-15 does not have a hostility requirement.
Healy Ranch P'ship v. Mines, 2022 S.D. 44, ¶ 45, 978 N.W.2d 768, 780 (quoting Lammers v. State ex rel. Dep't of Game, Fish & Parks, 2019 S.D. 44, ¶ 9, 932 N.W.2d 129, 132). "We will affirm a circuit court's 'grant of a motion for summary judgment when no genuine issues of material fact exist, and the legal questions have been correctly decided.'"