Opinion ID: 2586477
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: Elsie L. Braunstein's deposition

Text: [¶ 37] In Robinson's memorandum in support of its summary judgment motion, there is only limited reference to Braunstein's deposition: Elsie L. Braunstein has never talked to or corresponded with Alden Robinson, and she does not know any members of the Robinson family. A.53, p. 17, lns. 22-25, and p. 18, lns. 7-9, and lns. 18-20. Likewise, Melvin A. Braunstein did not know any members of the Robinson family. A.54, p. 19, lns. 24-25, and p. 20, lns. 1-2. In December 2004, defendant Elsie L. Braunstein caused 50 to 70 horses to be turned out on the property and adjacent property owned by Robinson. [no citation to Braunstein deposition] Prior to this, the Braunsteins had never used the property, and they had never rented the surface to anyone. A.56, p. 30, lns. 8-12; A.53, p. 17, lns. 5-9. (Emphasis added.) With respect to the underlined statement, we note that Robinson does not cite to Braunstein's deposition, and we have carefully read that deposition and find no such testimony. Because we examine Braunstein's deposition testimony from the vantage point most favorable to her, giving her the benefit of all favorable inferences which may fairly be drawn from her testimony, we may reasonably infer that no member of the Robinson family, either verbally or in writing, ever informed her or her late husband that Robinson was adversely claiming her property until it filed the present action. We find nothing in Braunstein's deposition that shows the absence of any genuine issue of material fact associated with the elements of Robinson's adverse possession claim. [¶ 38] We have completed our examination and evaluation of Robinson's evidentiary materials and have found most of them legally insufficient under the requirements of W.R.C.P. 56 and our summary judgment case law and have found that taken together they fail to show the absence of any genuine issue of material fact associated with the elements of Robinson's adverse possession claim. Because Robinson has failed to make a prima facie case of adverse possession, the presumption in favor of the record title holder Braunstein has not been rebutted. Consequently, Braunstein had no obligation to counter Robinson's summary judgment motion with materials beyond the pleadings. We reverse the district court's order granting summary judgment to Robinson and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.