Dirk buys a piece of property in California that is bordered on all four sides by properties owned by Rich; in other words, Dirks property is landlocked. The closest town to the properties is one mile south, but Dirk's only access to his property is via a road heading to the north. This road crosses a river and then intersects a highway. The next bridge on the highway is 20 miles away, whichever direction Dirk travels. So, in effect, the only way Dirk can get to the nearby town is by traveling over 20 miles in the wrong direction.

The southern side of Dirk's property is only twenty feet from the main public road that goes into the nearby town. Rich owns that 20 foot strip of land that blocks Dirks access to the public road. The entire area of these properties is remote and forested. Rich is rarely on his property.

Dirk can't stomach the idea of driving 20 miles out of his way so he makes a short cut to get to the main road. He clears the entire twenty foot strip right up to the side of the public road and fences off both sides of his clearing. So, Dirk has essentially added about 20 feet to his property along the entire edge of the public road.

For the next six years Dirk regularly uses the 20 foot strip as a driveway to the road. He also builds a garage on that strip so that he doesnt have to drive all the way through his property to his house. Dirk has the whole area surveyed and pays taxes on the entire piece of property. Dirk is not on his property all the time, but does spend almost every weekend there. Because of its remoteness, Rich never discovers Dirks use of the 20 strip until he decides to sell his property.

At that point, he tells Dirk to get off his property. Dirk refuses and a suit ensues. What is the likely result of the suit? What will Rich argue? What will Dirk argue? Explain your answers and give all sides.