Which scenario would typically illustrate adverse possession?

Adverse possession is a legal doctrine that allows a person to claim ownership of land under certain conditions, typically if they have occupied the land in a manner that is open, notorious, exclusive, and continuous for a specified period of time. The scenario of a neighbor planting flowers on contested land for years perfectly illustrates this concept.

In this context, the neighbor’s actions of cultivating and maintaining the land—by planting flowers—demonstrate an open and visible use of the property that others can see. This consistent and exclusive use implies a claim over the land, potentially leading to an adverse possession claim if the statutory requirements are met. Such actions can be sufficient for a court to determine that the neighbor has taken possession of the land as if they were the rightful owner, especially if the true owner has not contested the use within the legal time frame.

The other scenarios do not meet the necessary criteria for adverse possession. For example, a tenant failing to pay rent indicates a lease agreement rather than possession that could lead to a claim of ownership. An owner selling property involves a legitimate transfer of ownership, while a buyer receiving a warranty deed signifies an established legal ownership from the outset rather than a claim through adverse possession.