Such section of the Florida Statutes only became law on January 1, 1975. Prior to that, Section 95.16 and 95.17 as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 was the law. 369 So.2d at 664 (emphasis in original).
Such section of the Florida Statutes only became law on January 1, 1975. Prior to that, Section 95.16 and 95.17 as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 was the law. To fully comprehend the trial court's holding, a review of the law in this area is necessary.
In reaching its conclusion, the district court reviewed the history of section 95.16. In Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 (Fla. 1973), this Court considered adverse possession under section 95.17(2), Florida Statutes (1971), which says that land shall be deemed possessed This statute was a predecessor to section 95.16(2), Florida Statutes (1991), which is at issue in the instant case.
The Setons argue that their claim of adverse possession by color of title is supported by Seddon v. Harpster, 403 So.2d 409 (Fla. 1981). Earlier versions of section 95.16 were reviewed by the Florida supreme court in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 (Fla. 1973) and in Seddon. In both Meyer and Seddon, the contested lands were protected by a substantial enclosure, a fence.
Thus there was clear, positive proof of unbroken and continuous adverse possession for the required seven years. In Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 (Fla. 1973), our Florida Supreme Court held that a record title holder to disputed property would prevail over one who claimed adversely, even though the adverse party had maintained a fence enclosing the disputed property. While the case turned on issues different from those before us, we think the following language from the opinion is appropriate to our situation:
PER CURIAM. Upon careful consideration of the record and briefs and oral argument of counsel we affirm on the authority of Meyer v. Law, Fla., 287 So.2d 37, reh. den. December 12, 1973 (Florida Supreme Court Case No. 42,788, 287 So.2d 37, opinion filed July 5, 1973). MANN, C.J., BOARDMAN, J., and COWART, JOE A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
See Forman v. Ward, 219 So.2d 68, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969) (suggesting that compliance with this requirement of section 95.18 may be achieved by delivering a return based upon a legal description "having reference to a book and page number in the records of the circuit court clerk where a recorded deed may be found."). As stated in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37, 40-41 (Fla. 1973): In Florida, there are only two ways to acquire land by adverse possession.
Like the appellees' deed here, the deed's description in Seddon did not provide the precise description of the entire parcel including the disputed portion. The supreme court was called upon to construe and retroactively apply a revised adverse possession statute, chapter 74-382, Laws of Florida, which was passed by the legislature immediately after the supreme court decision in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 (Fla. 1973). Under Meyer, adverse possession under color of title could "only arise where the claimant had `paper' title accurately describing the disputed property."
In Florida, title to land may be acquired by adverse possession, either "under color of title," Section 95.16, Florida Statutes, or "without color of title," Section 95.17, Florida Statutes. Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37 (Fla. 1973). There was evidence adduced below which could form the basis of a finding by the trial court that appellee, and his mother, predecessor in title, exercised sufficient dominion and control over the waterfront property by fencing, improving, and maintaining it for the requisite time period, but the question remains as to whether this possession was "under color of title" in conformance with Section 95.16.
(e.s.) For Ward then to argue at trial that she was not on notice of Townsend's claim of adverse possession without color of title was, at best, inconsistent with her own pleadings. This ruling did not take into consideration the requisite elements of the two types of adverse possession as recognized by the Florida Supreme Court in Meyer v. Law, 287 So.2d 37, 40 (Fla. 1973): First, without color of title, the claimant must show seven years of open, continuous, actual possession, hostile to all who would challenge such possession, must both pay all taxes for the seven year period, returning said land for taxes during the first year of occupation, and enclose or cultivate said lands for the seven year period.