Opinion ID: 1195075
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Prima Facie Case Of Adverse Possession

Text: It is well established that one claiming title to real property by adverse possession must bear the burden of proving by clear and positive proof each element of actual, open, notorious, hostile, continuous[,] and exclusive possession for the statutory period. Lai v. Kukahiko, 58 Haw. 362, 368-69, 569 P.2d 352, 357 (1977) (citations omitted). [6] The burden of clear and positive proof derives from the long-observed proposition that [a]dverse possession is to be taken strictly, and every presumption is in favor of a possession in subordination to the rightful owner. Territory v. Pai-a, 34 Haw. 722, 726 (1938) (citation and internal quotation signals omitted). Thus, in the present case, the already formidable preconditions to prevailing on a motion for summary judgment combine with the similarly demanding requisites of a prima facie case of adverse possession in such a manner as to render the Morinoues' initial burden particularly heavy.