United States Leading Case tackingcontinuityprivity

Howard v. Kunto

477 P.2d 210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1970)

JurisdictionUnited States

CourtCourt of Appeals of Washington (Division 2)

Year1970

StatusPersuasive authority

Key Principle

For adverse possession, continuity of possession may be satisfied by seasonal use consistent with the property's character, and successive occupants may 'tack' their periods of possession where there is privity — a reasonable connection — even if the deeds misdescribe the land actually occupied.

Area of Law

Land & Property

Related Cases

Dolan v. City of Tigard 512 U.S. 374 (1994); 114 S. Ct. 2309; 129 L. Ed. 2d 304

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council 505 U.S. 1003 (1992); 112 S. Ct. 2886; 120 L. Ed. 2d 798

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission 483 U.S. 825 (1987); 107 S. Ct. 3141; 97 L. Ed. 2d 677

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Howard v. Kunto and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Howard v. Kunto