ÿWPCm ‚rO]“'…ÎVéIé“bÂ_÷Ò©´RX4篳Ùsˆ=î†ÚO»¡Ž\þp‚+ŒAþÆÖ\œùýq‡¸O¼ìñ$ÁËŸQ”˜ónˆæesW„ AÃáÌP Fß&p†)ô¯>9‡¯³ŽîpBÈ8ø¦‘<ñúw÷«ê!‡ÉHù¬ôfUÛé‚å%*×8–öÓÊ<4×Z4‚pBFï*¹´Òò„bµ.ʤQ—{måhtB îËõÖêÛ"Z¿±V¨y$ý ¬JËÓV%g>GPr.]G6öuýbXn%‰‰÷šfp=n0­å‚ãR¥ôñâò5þÞjOA‰7ù…el§8˜AüZÕO B¥.ý*# LU NW %¥ 0N« 0ÍùbÆw@Î4"1†9¿ 0DÇ P N[ ^ ] i mk R‚ ôÔ 0DÈ: FU:J:„„„:¾:øøø AQ2ƃ 0DI 0D BÑÑ D/îî B D3:˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ'í€"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular¼(&öy$¡¡Ó  ÓÙñÓ Ù(}(2B>$¤¤Ý ƒöy!ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XÞÅX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù- ^ D_ D` Ua Ub Uc Ud Ue f Ó€p ìu[%3|xp crowell v. hasty - opinion Í1$ ' IB011C20IB011C2 .    (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó FÝ ƒ²$ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XÎÚX»¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€the€words€of€the€deed,€ð ðrunning€thence€in€a€Westerly€direction€with€the€South€[sic€North]Ð d Ðproperty€line€of€Thompson.ððZ™’%c ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ HÝ ƒB>$ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XÞÅX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThis€deed€was€referred€to€throughout€the€trial€as€a€ð ðboundary€deedðð€because€the€onlyÐ Ü Ðdescription€of€the€property€it€contained€was€ð ðBounded€on€the€north€by€George€Sanders;€east€byÏGeorge€Sanders;€south€by€Earnest€Haynes,€and€west€by€Ô_ÔLemÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔClardyÔ_Ô,€containing€Ô_ÔfouteenÔ_Ô€[sic]€acres.ðð êÝ ƒ²$ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XÎÚX»¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMr.€Ô_ÔCrowellÔ_Ô€later€purchased€another€21„acre€tract€to€the€south€of€the€other€four€tracts.€ThisÐ Ü Ðtractððs€northern€boundary€is€the€southern€boundary€of€the€tract€he€purchased€in€January€1967.€€AÏportion€of€this€tractððs€southern€boundary€abuts€Highway€41A.€($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó 0Ñ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ À ÑÑ d Ñ úÝ ƒ"¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€¼f¨¼¼¼ÔÔ€SÒ ¼¼f¨ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X#( X SÒÔÐ  ÐÌDecember€22,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,@ÓÐAZ‹"Arial Regular 0Ñ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ À ÑÑ d Ñ 0Ñ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ ° ÑÑ Ü Ñ 0Ñ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ À ÑÑ d Ñ!"#&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý d(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd$$$$'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒöy!ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑܰÑÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ  ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€¶Ñ¼¼ddÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ€ ÑÑ€+pÑÑ€+pÑÑ€+pÑñ^ ñÐ Ü ÐÌñ^ ññp ññf ñßr€ )<,(j 8` `€€@E Ý` 8ttxPXÜð  rßñf ññp ññp ñßt€ )>.*jxÛÿ4` `€€@Eû` 8ttxP3Hð È tßñp ñà@¡ ¡ DàÔ€„ÍŸ„¼¼Ôò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@ÜÜ)DàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌÌÌñ_ ñÌñ_ ñÔ€¼¶Ñ¼„„ÍŸÔñ_ ñÌñ_ ñó óW.€J.€CROWELL€and€wife,à À àà  à)Ð ä  ÐMILDRED€P.€CROWELL,à À àà  à)Ð ú  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à À àà  à)Ð &J  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àBedford€ChanceryÐ <`  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àNo.€17,899Ð Rv  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð hŒ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àAppeal€No.Ð ~¢  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p à01A01„9609„CH„00431Ð ”¸  ÐLARRY€DON€HASTY€and€wife,à  à)Ð ªÎ ÐCONNIE€MARIE€HASTY,à À àà  à)Ð Àä Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àDefendants/Appellees.à À àà  à)Ð ì ÐÌñ` ñÌñ` ñÌÌà@  DàAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€BEDFORD€COUNTYˆÌà@°°#DàAT€SHELBYVILLE,€TENNESSEEˆÌña ñÌña ñÌà@ª ª DàTHE€HONORABLE€TYRUS€H.€COBB,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌñb ñÌñb ñÌÌòòFor€the€Plaintiffs/Appellantsóó:à À àà  àà p àà È àòòFor€the€Defendants/Appelleesóó:Ð  )D# ÐÌC.€Kelly€Wilsonà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àAndrew€C.€RamboÐ L+p%! ÐShelbyville,€Tennesseeà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àShelbyville,€TennesseeÐ b,†&" ÐÌÌÌÌÌà@%DàÔ€„ÍŸ„¼¼¶ÑÔò òAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óˆÐ æ2 -( ÐÌÔ€¼¶Ñ¼„„ÍŸÔÌÌÌñc ñÌñc ñÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÐ $;H5/— ÐÓ€ÓÔ€„ÍŸ„¼¼¶ÑÔñf ñòòóóñf ñà@ÎÎ)Dàò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óˆÐ Ü ÐÔ€¼¶Ñ¼„„ÍŸÔÌà ` àThis€appeal€involves€a€dispute€between€neighbors€over€the€location€ofÏapproximately€five€acres€of€property€along€Old€Virginia€Road€in€rural€BedfordÏCounty.€€The€owners€of€the€property€filed€suit€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€BedfordÏCounty€alleging€that€their€neighbors€were€trespassing€on€the€property€and€requestingÏa€judicial€determination€of€the€propertyððs€location.€€Their€neighbors€asserted€that€theyÏowned€the€disputed€property€and€that€the€plaintiff€property€owners€were€mistakenÏabout€the€location€of€their€tract.€€Following€a€bench€trial,€the€trial€court€determinedÏthat€the€plaintiff€property€ownersðð€tract€was€actually€over€1,150€feet€to€the€south€ofÏwhere€they€thought€it€was€and€that€the€plaintiff€property€owners€had€not€establishedÏa€claim€to€the€disputed€property€by€adverse€possession.€€On€this€appeal,€the€plaintiffÏproperty€owners€assert€that€the€evidence€does€not€support€the€trial€courtððs€decisionÏregarding€the€location€of€the€property€and€their€adverse€possession€claim.€€WeÏdisagree€and,€therefore,€affirm€the€judgment.€ÌÌà@ùù.Dàò òI.ó óˆà p àÐ g ‹  ÐÌà ` àW.€J.€Crowell€is€a€general€contractor€and€real€estate€broker€who€lives€inÏShelbyville.€€In€the€mid„1960s,€he€began€purchasing€property€on€Old€Virginia€RoadÏin€the€vicinity€of€Unionville.€€He€first€became€interested€in€a€14„acre€tract€owned€byÏCecil€and€Betty€Compton.€€When€Mr.€Crowell€discovered€that€the€property€wasÏseparated€from€Old€Virginia€Road€by€approximately€290€feet,€Mr.€ComptonÏrecommended€that€he€discuss€buying€the€strip€of€land€between€the€eastern€boundaryÏof€the€14„acre€tract€and€the€road€from€W.€H.€Bomar.€€Mr.€Bomar€agreed€to€sell€theÏproperty€to€Mr.€Crowell€ð ðfor€a€price.ðð€€Thus,€on€March€18,€1966,€W.€J.€and€MildredÏP.€Crowell€purchased€the€14„acre€tract€from€the€Comptons.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€On€March€22,€1966,€theÐ ±0Õ*4 ÐCrowells€purchased€a€5„acre€tract€from€W.€H.€and€Ruberta€C.€Bomar,€believing€thatÏthe€western€boundary€of€this€tract€ran€along€the€eastern€boundary€of€the€14„acre€tractÏthey€had€purchased€four€days€earlier€from€the€Comptons.Ð ”5¸/: Їà ` àIn€1967,€Mr.€Crowell€purchased€two€more€tracts€of€property€in€the€area€that€heÏbelieved€were€contiguous€with€the€two€tracts€he€had€purchased€in€1966.€€In€JanuaryÏ1967,€he€acquired€a€tract€behind€the€tract€he€had€purchased€from€the€Comptons€inÏMarch€1966.€€In€September€1967,€he€purchased€from€Ernest€Haynes€a€15„acre€tractÏadjacent€to€the€14„acre€tract€he€had€purchased€from€the€Comptons.€€The€northernÏboundary€of€this€tract€is€the€southern€boundary€of€the€14„acre€tract€purchased€fromÏthe€Comptons.€€The€western€boundary€of€the€tract€is€the€eastern€boundary€of€theÏproperty€Mr.€Crowell€purchased€in€January€1967.€€Mr.€Crowell€also€believed€that€theÏeastern€boundary€of€this€tract€was€the€western€boundary€of€the€tract€he€had€purchasedÏfrom€Mr.€Bomar€on€March€22,€1966.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Mr.€Crowell€removed€fences€and€clearedÐ Œ° Ðportions€of€the€property.€€He€used€the€property€primarily€for€cutting€cedar€trees€andÏhunting€deer.ÌÌà ` àIn€October€1970,€W.€H.€Bomar€conveyed€a€tract€of€property€to€Haile€SelassieÏand€Frances€Marie€Arnold.€€This€tract€contained€approximately€59€acres,€excludingÏthe€5„acre€tract€that€Mr.€Bomar€had€conveyed€to€Mr.€Crowell€on€March€22,€1966.€ÏApproximately€46€acres€of€this€tract€was€immediately€to€the€north€of€the€tract€Mr.ÏCrowell€purchased€from€the€Comptons€in€March€1966.€€In€fact,€the€southern€boundaryÏof€the€Arnoldsðð€tract€was€the€northern€boundary€of€the€tract€the€Crowells€purchasedÏfrom€the€Comptons€in€March€1966.€€The€remainder€of€the€Arnoldsðð€tract,€except€forÏthe€property€conveyed€to€the€Crowells€in€March€1966,€was€a€strip€of€propertyÏbetween€270€and€297€feet€wide€and€between€1,985€and€2,100€feet€long€running€alongÏOld€Virginia€Road.ÌÌà ` àOn€April€3,€1980,€the€Arnoldsðð€property€was€sold€at€the€courthouse€steps€as€aÏresult€of€the€Arnoldsðð€divorce€proceeding.€€Larry€Don€and€Connie€Marie€HastyÏpurchased€the€property,€and€on€April€7,€1980,€received€a€deed€to€the€59.1€acre€tractÐ p5”/: ÐÑ+pÑâ âÑÑÑ  ÑÑÀ°ÑÑdÜÑâ âÑ  Ñless€the€property€that€had€been€conveyed€to€the€Crowells€in€March€1966.€€Mr.€Hasty,Ïa€licensed€engineer,€believed€that€the€tract€was€essentially€square€in€shape€and€hiredÏRex€Northcutt€to€survey€the€property.€€At€this€point,€Mr.€Hasty€discovered€that€theÏproperty€he€had€purchased€included€that€long,€narrow,€13„acre€strip€of€propertyÏrunning€adjacent€to€Old€Virginia€Road.€€The€survey€also€revealed€that€the€tract€Mr.ÏCrowell€had€purchased€from€Mr.€Bomar€was€actually€on€the€southern€portion€of€thisÏstrip€rather€than€the€northern€portion€where€Mr.€Crowell€believed€it€had€been.ÌÌà ` àRelying€on€this€survey,€Mr.€Hasty€began€to€erect€a€fence€along€Old€VirginiaÏRoad€between€the€road€and€the€14„acre€tract€Mr.€Crowell€had€purchased€from€Mr.ÏCompton€in€March€1966.€€On€June€26,€1985,€Mr.€Crowell€sent€Mr.€Hasty€a€registeredÏletter€stating:€ð ðIt€has€come€to€my€attention€that€you€have€recently€erected€a€barbedÏwire€fence€on€my€property€on€Old€Virginia€Road.€€This€letter€is€to€request€you€toÏremove€this€fence€from€my€property€within€ten€days,€or€I€will€take€the€necessaryÏaction€to€move€it€myself.ðð€€Mr.€Hasty€did€not€respond€to€this€letter,€and€neither€Mr.ÏCrowell€nor€Mr.€Hasty€ever€discussed€the€letter.€€Since€purchasing€and€fencing€in€theÏproperty,€Mr.€Hasty€has€used€it€as€a€pasture€and€for€growing€hay.ÌÌà ` àIn€May€1992,€the€Crowells€filed€suit€against€the€Hastys€in€the€Chancery€CourtÏfor€Bedford€County€alleging€that€the€Hastys€were€trespassing€on€their€property.€€TheyÏalso€requested€$60,000€in€damages€and€a€declaration€of€the€location€of€the€boundaryÏlines€between€the€partiesðð€land.€€The€Hastys€denied€that€they€were€trespassing€andÏasserted€that€the€location€of€the€Crowellsðð€property€was€further€south€than€theÏCrowells€believed€it€was.€€After€joining€the€Bomars€as€third„party€defendants,€the€trialÏcourt€conducted€a€bench€trial€in€September€1995.€€During€the€trial,€the€HastysÏintroduced€Mr.€Northcuttððs€survey€showing€the€location€of€the€long,€narrow€strip€ofÏproperty€and€the€location€of€where€Mr.€Crowell€believed€his€5„acre€tract€was€locatedÏ(Tract€B)€as€well€as€the€location€of€where€the€surveyor€had€determined€that€this€tractÏwas€actually€located€(Tract€A).€€òòSeeóó€Appendix€One€to€this€opinion.€€In€NovemberÐ T3ð-8 Ð1995,€the€trial€court€filed€a€memorandum€concluding€that€Tract€A€was€the€tract€theÏCrowells€had€purchased€from€the€Bomars€on€March€22,€1966.€€The€trial€court€alsoÏdismissed€the€Crowellsðð€adverse€possession€claim.ÌÐ ä9€4@ Ðà@ËË.Dàò òII.ó óˆÐ d ÐÌà ` àWe€turn€first€to€the€Crowellsðð€assertion€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€determiningÏthat€the€tract€they€purchased€from€Mr.€Bomar€in€March€1966€was€Tract€A€rather€thanÏTract€B.€€They€insist€that€the€trial€courtððs€determination€is€inconsistent€with€their€deedÏand€with€the€undisputed€intentions€of€Messrs.€Crowell€and€Bomar.€€Regrettably,€theÏnumerous€clerical€errors€in€the€pertinent€deeds€create€ambiguities€over€whichÏreasonable€persons€might€differ.€€We€find,€however,€that€the€most€sensibleÏinterpretation€of€the€deeds€in€light€of€the€monuments€in€the€field€is€the€one€adoptedÏby€the€trial€court.ÌÌà ` àThe€Crowellsðð€challenge€to€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€concerning€the€locationÏof€the€tract€they€purchased€from€Mr.€Bomar€is€based€on€the€second€call€in€their€MarchÏ22,€1966€deed€which€describes€the€western€boundary€line€of€their€tract€as€follows:Ïð ðthence€in€a€Northerly€direction€with€Haynesðð€East€boundary€line€and€with€the€EastÏboundary€line€of€Crowell.ðð€€They€insist€that€this€boundary€line€could€only€be€theÏwestern€boundary€line€of€Tract€B€because,€at€the€time€of€the€conveyance€in€1966,€onlyÏthe€western€boundary€line€of€Tract€B€could€have€coincided€with€the€eastern€boundaryÏline€of€property€owned€by€both€the€Hayneses€and€the€Crowells.€€This€point€is€well„¼taken€but€is€also€inconsistent€with€the€location€of€the€southern€boundary€of€theÏproperty€described€in€the€first€call.ÌÌà ` àThe€southern€boundary€line€of€the€tract€the€Crowells€purchased€from€theÏBomars€in€March€1966€ran€east„to„west€along€the€northern€boundary€line€ofÏThompson.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€As€the€trial€court€found,€the€southern€boundary€line€of€the€tract€could€beÐ Ä,`'0 ÐThompsonððs€northern€boundary€line€only€if€the€tract€was€located€where€the€surveyorÏdesignated€Tract€A.€€To€buttress€the€trial€courtððs€reliance€on€the€reference€toÏThompsonððs€boundary€line,€the€surveyor€also€testified€unequivocally€that€he€foundÏthe€hub€and€the€pin€marking€both€the€southeastern€and€southwestern€corners€of€theÏtract€exactly€where€they€should€have€been.€€He€also€pointed€out€that€the€descriptionÏof€the€property€began€at€the€southeast€corner€of€the€tract€originally€conveyed€to€Mr.Ð œ681< ÐÑ+pÑâ âÑÑÑ  ÑÑÀÀÑÑddÑâ âÑ  ÑBomar€and€that€this€point€could€only€have€been€on€the€southernmost€end€of€theÏproperty€not€1,100€feet€to€the€north.ÌÌà ` àAs€an€aid€in€locating€disputed€boundaries,€the€courts€first€look€to€naturalÏobjects,€then€artificial€monuments,€then€the€boundaries€of€adjacent€landowners,€andÏfinally€to€courses€and€distances.€€òòSee€Pritchard€v.€Reborióó,€135€Tenn.€328,€332„33,€186Ð ˜ 4  ÐS.W.€121,€122€(1916);€òòBramblett€v.€Runyanóó,€631€S.W.2d€129,€131€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð <Ø  Ð1981).€In€this€case,€the€trial€court€based€its€decision€on€artificial€monuments€and€theÏboundaries€of€adjacent€landowners.€Having€reviewed€this€decision€under€Tenn.€R.ÏApp.€P.€13(d),€we€cannot€say€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€this€decision.ÌÌà ` àIn€addition€to€their€reliance€on€the€second€call€establishing€the€westernÏboundary€line€of€the€tract,€the€Ô_ÔCrowellsÔ_Ô€also€point€to€the€undisputed€fact€that€both€Mr.ÏCrowell€and€Mr.€Bomar€intended€to€convey€Tract€B€rather€than€Tract€A.€€They€argueÏthat€this€intention,€not€evident€on€the€face€of€the€deed,€should€somehow€trump€theÏdescription€of€the€propertyððs€boundaries€in€their€deed.€€The€partiesðð€intent€is€generallyÏderived€from€the€calls€in€the€deed.€€òòSee€Mayse€v.€Laffertyóó,€38€Tenn.€(1€Head)€60,€61„Ð ¤@  Ð62€(1858).€€However,€adjoining€property€owners€may€agree€upon€the€exact€locationÏof€their€common€boundary€lines€where€there€is€doubt€about€the€location€of€the€trueÏline.€€òòSee€Houstonððs€Heirs€v.€Matthewsóó,€9€Tenn.€(1€Yer.)€116,€118„19€(1826);Ð $,& ÐòòWinborn€v.€Alexanderóó,€39€Tenn.€App.€1,€17,€279€S.W.2d€718,€725€(1954).€€TheyÐ 4&Ð ( Ðcannot€change€boundaries€by€parole€agreement€when€the€calls€are€definite€and€wellÏunderstood.€€òòSee€May€v.€Abernathyóó,€23€Tenn.€App.€236,€242,€130€S.W.2d€135,€139Ð |)$, Ð(1939).ÌÌà ` àThis€record€contains€no€evidence€that€the€Crowells€on€one€hand€and€either€theÏBomars,€the€Arnolds,€or€the€Ô_ÔHastysÔ_Ô€on€the€other€had€any€disagreement€concerning€theÏlocation€of€the€boundary€lines€of€their€properties€or€that€they€entered€into€any€explicitÏparole€agreements€concerning€the€location€of€their€boundaries.€€Thus,€there€is€noÏexplicit€parole€agreement€that€prevents€the€Ô_ÔHastysÔ_Ô€from€relying€on€the€description€ofÏtheir€property€in€the€deed€they€received€from€the€clerk€and€master€in€1980.ÌÌÐ ä9€4@ ÐÑ Ñâ âÑÑÑ  ÑѰÀÑÑÜdÑâ âÑ  Ñà@-Dàò òIII.ó óˆÐ Ü ÐÌà ` àAs€a€final€matter,€the€Crowells€assert€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€findÏthat€they€had€acquired€title€to€Tract€B€by€adverse€possession€either€under€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€28„2„105€(1980)€or€by€virtue€of€the€common„law€doctrine€of€prescription.€WeÏhave€determined€that€the€Crowells€have€failed€to€carry€their€burden€under€eitherÏclaim,€first€because€they€did€not€establish€that€they€had€assurance€of€title€to€theÏproperty€they€are€now€claiming€and€second€because€they€have€not€possessed€theÏdisputed€property€adversely€for€twenty€years.ÌÌà@SSDàòòò òThe€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„2„105€Claimó óóóˆÐ Dh ÐÌà ` àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„2„105€enables€persons€who€have€continually€possessedÏproperty€for€seven€years€under€an€assurance€of€title€to€acquire€fee€simple€interest€inÏthe€property.€€A€deed€purporting€to€convey€a€fee€simple€estate€is€such€an€assuranceÏof€title,€òòsee€Southern€Iron€&€Coal€Co.€v.€Schwoonóó,€124€Tenn.€176,€203„04,€135€S.W.Ð xœ Ð785,€792€(1911);€òòSharp€v.€Vanwinkleóó,€80€Tenn.€15,€19€(1883),€even€if€the€deed€isÐ  @  Ðinvalid.€€òòSee€Wallace€v.€McPhersonóó,€187€Tenn.€333,€339,€214€S.W.2d€50,€53€(1947);Ð À!ä" ÐòòThurston€v.€University€of€N.C.óó,€72€Tenn.€513,€519„20€(1880).€€For€the€purpose€ofÐ d#ˆ$ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„2„105,€the€disputed€area€must€fall€within€the€calls€of€theÏadverse€possessorððs€deed.€€òòSee€Burks€v.€Bolesóó,€934€S.W.2d€653,€655€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð ¬&Ð ( Ð1996).€€The€statutory€prescriptive€period€does€not€commence€until€possession€of€theÏproperty€under€assurance€of€title€begins.€€òòSee€Barnes€v.€Vickersóó,€62€Tenn.€370,€372Ð ô)$, Ð(1874).ÌÌà ` àThe€party€claiming€title€through€adverse€possession€has€the€burden€of€proof.€ÏòòSee€Buchanan€v.€Nixonóó,€163€Tenn.€364,€369,€43€S.W.2d€380,€382€(1931);€òòÔ_ÔBlakemoreÔ_ÔÐ „0¨*4 Ðv.€Matthewsóó,€154€Tenn.€334,€341,€285€S.W.€567,€569€(1926).€€We€have€alreadyÐ (2L,6 Ðdetermined€that€the€March€22,€1966€deed€from€the€Bomars€to€the€Crowells€conveyedÏTract€A,€not€Tract€B.€€Evenñ\ ñ€ñ\ ññ] ñ€ñ] ññ\ ñif€we€ñ\ ñwere€ñ[ ñwe€ñ[ ñto€find€that€the€Crowells€have€been€possessingÏTract€B€adversely€since€1966,€no€part€of€Tract€B€was€included€within€the€calls€of€theÏMarch€22,€1966€deed.€€Thus,€the€Crowells€have€not€carried€their€burden€regarding€Ð ¸8Ü2> ÐÑ+pÑâ âÑÑÑ  ÑÑÀ°ÑÑdÜÑâ âÑ  Ñtheir€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„2„105€claim€because€they€have€failed€to€prove€that€theyÏwere€holding€adversely€the€property€covered€by€the€March€22,€1966€deed€from€theÏBomars.ÌÌà@  Dàòòò òThe€Common„Law€Prescription€Claimó óóóˆÐ ô  ÐÌà ` àParties€without€assurance€of€title€may€acquire€a€fee€simple€interest€in€propertyÏby€continuously€possessing€the€land€for€twenty€years€under€a€claim€of€right.€€òòSee€KeelÐ à|  Ðv.€Suttonóó,€142€Tenn.€341,€346,€219€S.W.€351,€353€(1920);€òòCooke€v.€Smithóó,€721€S.W.2dÐ „  Ð251,€255€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1986);€òòPreston€v.€Smithóó,€41€Tenn.€App.€222,€228,€293Ð (Ä ÐS.W.2d€51,€53€(1955).€€The€possession€must€be€actual,€adverse,€continuous,Ïexclusive,€visible,€and€notorious.€€òòSee€Catlett€v.€Whaleyóó,€731€S.W.2d€544,€546€(Tenn.Ð p  ÐCt.€App.€1987).€€Persons€seeking€to€establish€title€must€establish€their€possession€byÏclear€and€positive€proof,€òòsee€Jones€v.€Coal€Creek€Mining€&€Mfg.€Co.óó,€133€Tenn.€183,Ð ¸T Ð185,€180€S.W.€991,€992€(1915);€òòMcCammon€v.€Meredithóó,€830€S.W.2d€577,€580Ð \ø Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1991),€that€leaves€no€doubt€concerning€the€adverse€claim€ofÏownership.€€òòSee€Cooke€v.€Smithóó,€721€S.W.2d€at€254.€€To€be€adverse,€the€nature€of€theÐ ¤@  Ðpossession€need€only€be€consistent€with€the€nature€and€circumstances€of€the€landÏinvolved.€€òòSee€Bensdorff€v.€Uihleinóó,€132€Tenn.€193,€198,€177€S.W.€481,€482€(1915);Ð ì"ˆ$ ÐòòCatlett€v.€Whaleyóó,€731€S.W.2d€at€546.Ð $,& ÐÌà ` àWe€need€not€minutely€dissect€the€nature€of€the€Crowellsðð€possession€of€theÏdisputed€property€in€this€case€because€they€have€failed€to€demonstrate€that€they€haveÏpossessed€the€property€for€at€least€twenty€years.€€They€began€possessing€the€property,Ïbelieving€it€to€be€theirs,€in€March€1966.€€On€October€1970,€the€Bomars€conveyed€theÏproperty€to€the€Arnolds,€and€the€Hastys€purchased€the€Arnoldsðð€property€on€theÏcourthouse€steps€in€April€1980.€€In€June€1985,€the€Hastys€constructed€a€fence€aroundÏportions€of€the€property.€€In€addition€to€the€shortness€of€time€the€Crowells€possessedÏthe€property,€the€record€contains€no€evidence€that€either€the€Arnolds€or€the€HastysÏknew€or€should€have€known€of€the€Crowellsðð€adverse€claim.€€òòSee€Tidwell€v.€VanÐ ø4”/: ÐDeventeróó,€686€S.W.2d€899,€902€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€€Ð œ681< ÐÌñd ñÐ ä9€4@ Ðñd ñà@¥¥.Dàò òIV.ó óˆÐ d ÐÌà ` àWe€affirm€the€judgment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€whateverÏfurther€proceedings€may€be€required.€€We€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€to€W.€J.€CrowellÏand€Mildred€P.€Crowell€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.ÌÌÓ€Óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌ________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.€ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEñe ñ€Ð  ,È ÐѰdÑÑXÀÑà@¡ ¡ DàÔ‡„]ß„»¼º•Ôò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@† † "DàMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌÌÔ#†¼º•»„„]ßÌQ#Ôó óW.€J.€CROWELL€and€wife,à À àà  à)Ð P   ÐMILDRED€P.€CROWELL,à À àà  à)Ð h ¸ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à À àà  à)à p àBedford€ChanceryÐ ˜ è Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àNo.€17,899Ð °  ÐVS.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð È  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àAppeal€No.Ð à0  ÐLARRY€DON€HASTY€and€wife,à  à)à p à01A01„9609„CH„00431Ð øH  ÐCONNIE€MARIE€HASTY,à À àà  à)Ð `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àDefendants/Appellees.à À àà  à)Ð @ ÐÌÑ8€º•¼»d¼»d8ÑÓ€Óà@àà(DàÔ€„]ß„»¼º•Ôòòò òJ€U€D€G€M€E€N€Tóóó óˆÐ pÀ ÐÔ€¼º•»„„]ßÔÌà ` àThis€cause€came€on€to€be€heard€upon€the€record€on€appeal€from€the€BedfordÏCounty€Chancery€Court,€the€briefs€of€the€parties,€and€the€arguments€of€counsel.€€UponÏconsideration€of€the€entire€record,€this€court€finds€and€concludes€that€the€trial€courtððsÏjudgment€should€be€affirmed.ÌÌà ` àIn€accordance€with€the€opinion€filed€contemporaneously€with€this€judgment,Ïit€is,€therefore,€ordered,€adjudged,€and€decreed€that€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€be€andÏis€hereby€affirmed,€that€the€cause€be€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€furtherÏproceedings€consistent€with€this€courtððs€opinion,€and€that€the€costs€be€taxed€in€theÏmanner€provided€in€this€judgment.ÌÌà ` àIt€is€further€ordered€that€the€costs€of€this€appeal€be€taxed€against€W.J.€Crowell,Ïprincipal,€and€Mildred€P.€Crowell,€and€C.€Kelly€Wilson,€surety,€for€which€executionÏmay€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓ€ÓÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.€ÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGE€ÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à____________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEñe ñ