ÿWPCÈ îMÉ–æ(öäÇ9„íߟPõ'6±‰ ¸ÛÆ>ÌâÓS"öæÇãÓA…µ§ôþ ´ƒÁ9© lžh"¼ÂÿI"?ôKl{; ‡8P8§µR;ý%"7’àœ_ý™À!®.† pì“ ž‹š÷fNð]×Ç*«©õL±ý›†„Gïež{'œ&au'Ô׊S¡FÖÖAÙØ ö¦ø½Úp…Q™†ñFœ•C‚ò‰¼Ã*S–gðÑÉÅbx£·,ÁÙ¢ý@c+hí?öù ö'ñ¾¹Á,µ7zkÙé–ºuàSP-uh¨hìXtUO ÷9 w¶tðõ3«ÞˆÔ}•`=lPÚâꉆ÷ói .g …mG ø¢ïŽ‹gõM-È}Ó¤€9!{È´{Žéíå#ÁuùªK-<ïÎErŒ×¬Ê÷ØÞG†RÒ'Lfj® '²9W¦Ô ÇëúÓ̺`íTmrb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ ™ Æ¡ Æg Æ-ÆóóN¹¹¹E»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»b½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½ 0ëÅÅÅÅ B°° 0¤Í D3q D-¤ 0KÑÑ ASÆo 0¤5 0DÙ A«˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»´‹/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularqdj/B011C8 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2_$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€J%»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôêÅò»»Ô d(|3‰P$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€J%»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‰P$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€J%»»dXXdì8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€J%»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼J%»»»ÔÑ8€‰XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îJ¬î»¼J%ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼J%»îîJ¬ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Ó€November€4,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X‰X»¼J%ÔÌò òÔ#†¼J%»XX‰ö#ÔCECIL€JACOBS,€òòet€al.óó€v.€EDWIN€UNDERHILL,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡X‰X»¼J%Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Perry€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€4163€€€€€€Timothy€L.€Easter,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2002„02866„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€15,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ԀР¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€appellants€challenge€the€trial€courtððs€Order€commanding€them€to€remove€a€portion€of€their€patioÐ xÈ  Ðand€garage€and€any€portion€of€their€residence€constructed€since€1999€which€encroaches€on€theÐ d´ Ðappelleesðð€property.€€We€affirm.Ð P  ÐÓ¼ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ (x ÐAffirmed€and€Remandedó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼J%»àX‰w#ÔÔ‡X‰X.¼J%ÔWilliam€B.€Cain,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòóóWòòILLIAMóó€C.€KòòOCHóó,€JòòRóó.,€P.J.,€M.S.,Ð ì< Ðand€òòóóFòòRANK€óóG.€CòòLEMENTóó,€JòòR.óó,€J.,€joined.Ð Ø( ÐÌÔ_ÔRickyÔ_Ô€L.€Wood,€Parsons,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Edwin€Underhill€and€Robbie€Jo€Underhill.Ð ° ÐÌDana€Dye,€Ô_ÔCentervilleÔ_Ô,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellees,€Cecil€Jacobs,€Gary€Jacobs€and€Linda€Ô_ÔHittÔ_Ô.Ð ˆØ ÐÓ‹ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼J%»XX‰º#ÔÔ‡X‰X»¼J%ÔÐ `° ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼J%»XX‰I #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X‰X»¼J%Ôà  àOn€August€2,€2001,€Cecil€Jacobs,€Gary€Jacobs€and€Linda€Ô_ÔHittÔ_Ô€filed€a€Complaint€in€PerryÐ 8!ˆ  ÐCounty€Chancery€Court€seeking€an€order€requiring€Edwin€Underhill,€and€his€wife,€Robbie€JoÐ $"t! ÐUnderhill€to€remove€a€portion€of€a€newly€constructed€carport€and€patio€which€constructionÐ #`" Ðencroached€upon€the€Jacobsðð€property.€€The€Jacobsðð€quitclaim€deed€provides€the€followingÐ ü#L# Ðdescription€of€the€subject€property:Ð è$8 $ ÐÌà8  àBeginning€at€the€northerly€common€corner€of€Lots€Nos.€5€and€3€where€said€cornerÐ À&"& Ðintersects€with€the€southwesterly€margin€of€an€18€foot€private€road€off€of€Ô_ÔLakeviewÔ_ԀР¬'ü"' ÐDrive;€thence€North€8€deg.€West€43€feet€to€a€point;€thence€due€North€to€a€point€in€theÐ ˜(è#( Ðsoutherly€line€of€Lot€No.€6;€thence€North€85€deg.€West€along€the€common€line€ofÐ „)Ô$) ÐLots€Nos.€5€and€6,€190€feet€more€or€less€to€the€waters€edge€of€Kentucky€Lake;€thenceÐ p*À%* ÐÔ_Ôwith€the€easterly€margin€of€said€lake€as€it€meanders€in€a€southerly€direction165€feetÐ \+¬&+ Ðâ âto€a€point,€being€the€northwesterly€common€corner€of€Lots€Nos.€4€and€5;€thenceÐ H,˜',ý ÐÔ_ÔSouth€85€deg.€East€166€feet€to€a€point,€being€the€common€corner€of€Lots€Nos.€3,€4Ð ° Ðand€5;€thence€North€29€deg.€East€143.5€feet€to€the€point€of€beginning.€ÐœìÐ Ð  Ðâ âÌà  àThe€Underhills€admitted€the€construction,€but€denied€that€the€construction€constituted€aÐ tÄ Ðtrespass€on€the€Plaintiffsðð€property.€€In€particular,€the€defendants€Underhill€averred€the€followingÐ `° Ðparagraphs€as€affirmative€defenses:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà ` à1.à ¸ àDefendants€state€that€they€are€entitled€to€possession€of€all€lands€withinÐ $ t Ðtheir€boundary€and€within€their€closure€not€only€by€title€deed,€but€any€claims€otherÐ  ` Ðpersons€may€have€against€same€are€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations,€and€alsoÐ ü L  Ðviolate€Section€28„2„101/102/103€and€105,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated,€since€noÐ è 8  Ðclaim€or€suit€has€been€filed€by€Plaintiffs€against€the€Defendants€within€the€period€ofÐ Ô$  Ðthe€statute€of€limitations€set€forth€therein,€and€any€claim€is€no€barred.€€Further,€theÐ À  ÐPlaintiffs€have€not€paid€any€taxes€on€said€land€enclosed€within€the€DefendantsððÐ ¬ü  Ðdescription€therefore€and€any€claims€they€may€have€is€barred€by€Section€28„2„Ð ˜è  Ð109/110,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated.€€In€fact,€the€Plaintiffs€have€not€at€any€timeÐ „Ô  Ðexercised€any€possession€of€said€land€in€any€way,€nor€have€they€had€any€title€theretoÐ pÀ Ðin€any€way€at€any€time,€and€they€are€not€entitled€to€any€interest€in€any€land€enclosedÐ \¬ Ðwithin€the€description€of€the€Defendantsðð€tract€of€land€as€set€forth€in€their€title€deedÐ H˜ Ðaforesaid.Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à2.à ¸ àThe€Defendants€rely€on€adverse€possession€as€a€barr€to€the€PlaintiffsððÐ  p Ðclaim€for€relief.Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à3.à ¸ àDefendants€state€that€the€Plaintiffsðð€Deed€is€defective€and€has€severalÐ øH Ðcalls€which€are€missing€and€as€such€the€Deed€will€not€close.€€The€Plaintiffs€shouldÐ ä4 Ðbe€estopped€from€asserting€a€position€inconsistent€with€the€boundaries€contained€inÐ Ð  Ðtheir€Deed.€Ð¼ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àWith€the€action€thus€joined,€the€chancellor€heard€the€matter€on€September€12,€2002.€€TheÐ ”ä Ðchancellor€entered€written€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€in€which€he€specifically€found€thatÐ €Ð Ðthe€Jacobs€ð ðpossess€an€interest€as€tenants€in€common,€to€the€exclusion€of€all€others,€all€propertiesÐ l¼ Ðdescribed€in€their€quitclaim€deed€.€.€.€including€that€portion€of€land€where€Defendantsðð€new€patio€andÐ X ¨ Ðgarage€now€encroach.ðð€€The€chancellor€concluded€that,€since€the€encroachment€occurred€in€theÐ D!” Ðprocess€of€remodeling€in€2000,€as€the€result€of€a€storm,€that€the€encroachment€was€not€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðexclusive,€continuous€nature,€and€for€the€duration€required€to€establish€adverse€possession.€€FromÐ #l! Ðthe€trial€courtððs€order€requiring€removal€of€the€patio€and€garage,€the€Underhills€appeal,€asserting€asÐ $X" Ðerror€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€find€that€the€plaintiffs€were€equitably€estopped€from€vindicating€theirÐ ô$D # Ðproprietary€interest€in€the€land€upon€which€Defendants€admittedly€encroached.€€It€is€well€settled€inÐ à%0!$ Ðthis€jurisdiction€that€equitable€estoppel€is€an€affirmative€defense€to€be€pled€specifically€and€set€forthÐ Ì&"% Ðaffirmatively€in€the€pleadings€before€the€Court.€€òòSee€Alexander€v.€Armentroutóó,€24€S.W.3d€267,€272Ð ¸'#& Ð(Tenn.2000).€€Because€this€defense€was€never€raised€during€the€trial€court€proceedings,€the€issue€isÐ ¤(ô#' Ðwaived€and€this€Court€cannot€consider€the€defense.€€T.R.A.P.€3(e);€T.R.A.P.€36(a),€òòAlexanderóó,€24Ð )à$( ÐS.W.3d€at€272.€€This€Court€affirms€the€findings€and€conclusions€of€the€chancery€court€in€theirÐ |*Ì%) Ðentirety€and€expressly€adopts€the€following€excerpt€from€the€courtððs€conclusions€of€law:Ð h+¸&* Їà8  àà ` àThe€general€law€regarding€boundary€line€disputes€is€that€in€determiningÐ ° Ðboundaries€resort€is€to€be€had,€first,€to€natural€objects€or€landmarks,€because€of€theirÐ œì Ðvery€permanent€character,€next,€to€artificial€monuments€or€markers,€then€to€boundaryÐ ˆØ Ðlines€of€adjacent€owners,€and€then€to€courses€and€distances.€€But€this€general€rule,€asÐ tÄ Ðto€the€relative€importance€of€these€guides€to€the€ascertainment€of€a€boundary€of€land,Ð `° Ðis€not€an€inflexible€or€absolute€one.ÐL œÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€use€of€the€rule€is€as€a€measure€to€the€discovery€of€the€intentions€of€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðparties.€€To€arrive€at€the€intention€of€the€parties€to€the€instrument€is€the€purpose€of€allÐ $ t Ðrules€of€construction,€and€this€applies€to€the€description€of€premises€conveyed€as€wellÐ  ` Ðas€to€other€parts€of€the€instrument.€€òòPritchard€vs.€Reborióó,€186€S.W.€121€(Tenn.1916).Ðü L Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€metes€and€bounds€set€forth€in€the€legal€descriptions€of€the€PlaintiffsððÐ è 8  Ðquitclaim€deed,€the€Defendantsðð€warranty€deed,€and€the€deeds€to€the€propertyÐ Ô$  Ðadjoining€the€Defendantsðð€property€(Dill€and€Noland€deeds)€(Trial€Exhibits€15€andÐ À  Ð16)€were€all€found€and€established€by€Tony€Reasonsðð€survey.€€Plaintiffsðð€evidenceÐ ¬ü  Ðclearly€proves€that€they€are€the€true€owner€of€the€lands€described€in€paragraph€1€ofÐ ˜è  Ðtheir€complaint.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€16„11„106(b).Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àClaims€by€Defendant€of€adverse€possession€of€the€disputed€property€areÐ pÀ Ðclaims€which€are€not€adverse€at€all.€€Before€a€party€is€justified€in€relying€upon€theÐ \¬ Ðdefensive€remedy€of€adverse€possession,€there€must€be€exclusive,€actual,€adverse,Ð H˜ Ðcontinuous,€open€and€notorious€possession€for€the€entire€prescribed€period.€€òòCatlettÐ 4„ Ðvs.€Whaleyóó,€731€S.W.2d€544€(Tenn.Ct.App.1987).€€Defendants€have€never€claimedÐ  p Ðexclusive€possession€of€the€land€in€question.€€They€never€disputed€that€the€PlaintiffsÐ  \ Ðallowed€them€to€use€the€Plaintiffsðð€property€to€park€their€vehicles€and€share€in€aÐ øH Ðneighborly€fashion€the€Plaintiffsðð€property.€€Neither€the€Plaintiffs€nor€the€DefendantsÐ ä4 Ðused€the€disputed€property€to€the€exclusion€of€the€other,€until€Defendants€beganÐ Ð  Ðconstruction€the€new€patio€and€garage.€Ð¼ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àFurther,€the€actual€smaller€piece€of€property€containing€the€Defendantsðð€newlyÐ ¨ø Ðconstructed€patio€and€garage€did€not€become€an€issue€until€spring€of€2000,€when€theÐ ”ä ÐDefendants€began€their€construction.€€This€lawsuit€was€filed€on€August€2,€2001.€Ð €Ð ÐActual€possession€for€seven€(7)€years€is€necessary€to€bar€the€right€of€the€true€owner.€Ð l¼ ÐT.C.A.€ðð€28„2„101,€et€seq.€€The€Defendantsðð€adverse€possession,€if€it€in€fact€hadÐ X ¨ Ðexisted,€fails€to€meet€the€necessary€duration€required€for€such€claim.ÐD!”Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€Defendants€have€failed€in€their€burden€of€establishing€adverseÐ 0"€  Ðpossession.€€òòMoore€vs.€Brannanóó,€42€Tenn.€App.€542,€304€S.W.2d€660€(1957).€€TheÐ #l! Ðlegal€presumption€is€that€the€possession€of€land€is€in€the€person€having€the€legal€title.€Ð $X" ÐòòSmith€vs.€Crossóó,€125€Tenn.€159,€140€S.W.€1060€(1911).€€The€presumption€is€againstÐ ô$D # Ðan€adverse€possession€between€privies.€€òòHubbard€vs.€Woodððs€Lesseeóó,€33€Tenn.€(1Ð à%0!$ ÐSneed)€270€(1853).€€Defendants€have€failed€to€overcome€the€presumption€that€legalÐ Ì&"% Ðtitle€and€possession€of€the€disputed€property€rest€with€the€Plaintiffs.и'#&Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àDefendants€claim€ownership€interest€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€28„2„109€and€110.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐThe€presumption€raised€by€ðð€28„2„109€is€rebuttable.€€òòWelch€vs.€A.B.C.€Coal€Co.óó,€41Ð )à$( ÐTenn.€App.€208,€293€S.W.2d€44€(1956);€òòLandworks,€Inc.€vs.€Vickóó,€2002€Tenn.€App.Ð |*Ì%) ÐLEXIS€134,€February€19,€2002.€€The€tax€evidence€relied€upon€by€the€Defendants,Ð h+¸&* Ðincluding€testimony€of€the€property€assessor€and€county€trustee,€Trial€Exhibits€17,€24,Ð ° Ð25€and€26,€fail€to€establish€that€the€taxes€paid€by€the€Defendants€on€land€in€PerryÐ œì ÐCounty€is€the€same€land€described€in€the€Plaintiffsðð€deed,€the€Defendantsðð€deed€or€anyÐ ˆØ Ðother€legal€or€equitable€interest€arising€through€conveyance,€grant€or€other€assuranceÐ tÄ Ðof€title€recorded€in€the€Registerððs€Office€of€Perry€County.€€The€Defendants,€therefore,Ð `° Ðare€not€entitled€to€the€presumption€of€ownership€pursuant€to€ðð28„2„109.€ÐL œÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€Defendants€also€claim€ownership€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€ðð€28„2„110.€€Again,Ð 8 ˆ Ðas€stated€in€the€previous€paragraph,€Defendants€have€failed€to€establish€that€theirÐ $ t Ðclaim€to€real€estate€or€land€or€to€any€legal€or€equitable€interest€therein€is€the€same€realÐ  ` Ðestate€or€land€that€is€the€subject€of€this€lawsuit.€€Furthermore,€the€Defendants€haveÐ ü L  Ðfailed€to€clearly€show€that€the€Plaintiffs€have€failed€to€pay€their€taxes.€€A€partyÐ è 8  Ðattempting€to€rely€on€this€section€as€a€bar€must€clearly€show€that€the€other€party€failedÐ Ô$  Ðto€pay€the€taxes.€€òòBone€vs.€Logginóó,€652€S.W.2d€758€(Tenn.Ct.App.1982).€ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Order€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€appellantsÐ ˜è  Ðfor€which€execution€may€issue.Ð „Ô  ÐÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGE