Derynda made no such claim. By not declaring in his answers any legal interest in the strip, Derynda terminated his right to participate in this action. Moreover, we note that Derynda has repeatedly disclaimed any legal interest in this property throughout these proceedings. At a deposition, Derynda was directly questioned if he claimed legal ownership of the strip. Furthermore, while he initially pursued a counterclaim requesting a judicial determination of the permissible uses of the strip, he later withdrew that claim prior to trial.
Adverse possession is the issue disputed by the parties.
In an adverse possession, the only parties who generally have standing are the property's titleholder and the party claiming adverse possession. Derynda is neither. He does not claim a legal interest in the strip as either the titleholder or the adverse possessor. Derynda's claims of injury due to an invasion of his privacy and a diminution of his property's value also do not confer standing. The claim of loss of use and enjoyment of his property because of privacy invasion is probably more appropriately addressed through a nuisance action.