Adverse possession and acquiescence are both ways that a person can get title to property held by someone else by occupying that property. The Court of Appeals in Haynes v. Village of Beulah recently addressed the application (or lack thereof) of these concepts to right-of-ways taken by municipalities for the building of roads.
The right-of-way taken by a municipality is often larger than just the portion of land on which the road will be built. In Haynes, the property owner’s land was bordered by two public roads. The right-of-way extended past the travelled portion of the road. However, since the 1960’s, the plaintiff, and the previous owner of the property, had occupied that portion of the right-of way as if it were their own.
When the Village introduced plans that would create angled parking, a new sidewalk, and a streetscape on that right-of-way, the property owner objected. The property owner claimed that it had acquired the property in that portion of the right-of-way through acquiescence.
The Court of Appeals, however, affirmed the lower court’s decision that held that the property owner was prevented from acquiring the land pursuant to MCL 247.190. MCL 247.190 states that “[a]ll public highways for which the right of way has at any time been dedicated . . . shall be and remain a highway of the width so dedicated . . . and no encroachments . . . shall give the party or parties, firm or corporation so encroaching, any title or right to the land so encroached upon.”
In holding that the property owner could not gain title to any part of the public road right-of-way, the court interpreted the term “highway” broadly as used in the statute, and therefore applicable to village streets.
