Opinion ID: 2704
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Walczyks' Lawsuits Claiming Adverse Possession

Text: The following month, in April 1988, Elizabeth and Lucien Walczyk sued for adverse possession of the undeveloped property. The action settled in 1991 with Barberino paying the elder Walczyks $20,000 and granting them a perpetual agricultural easement over a portion of the disputed land. In return, Elizabeth and Lucien Walczyk signed a quitclaim of any right, title, or interest in the property and promised not to oppose Barberino's development plans before the town planning and zoning commission. Four years later, in January 1995, Thomas Walczyk sued Barberino, as well as his parents, claiming that he held title to the disputed property through adverse possession. On March 14, 1997, the Connecticut Superior Court rejected Walczyk's claim as a matter of law. [3] In granting judgment to Barberino and quieting title in its favor, the Connecticut court stated: Thomas Joseph Walczyk has no estate, interest in or encumbrance of said real property or any part thereof. Walczyk v. Barberino Realty & Dev. Corp., No. cv-950465712S, 1997 WL 149286, at , 1997 Conn.Super. LEXIS 718, at  (Conn.Super.Ct. Mar. 14, 1997). This judgment was affirmed on direct appeal, see Walczyk v. Barberino Realty & Dev. Corp., 48 Conn. App. 911, 719 A.2d 1233 (Conn.App.Ct. 1998), and the Connecticut Supreme Court declined further review, see Walczyk v. Barberino Realty & Dev. Corp., 245 Conn. 904, 719 A.2d 1165 (1998).