Easements. The Wallens family owned a cabin on Lummi Island in the state of Washington.

A driveway ran from the cabin across their property to South Nugent Road. In $1952,$ Floyd Massey

bought the adjacent lot and built a cabin. To gain access to his property, he used a bulldozer to

extend the driveway without the Wallenses$$ permission but also without their objection. In $1975,$

the Wallenses sold their property to Wright Fish Co$.$ Massey continued to use and maintain the

driveway without permission or objection. In $1984,$ Massey sold his property to Robert Drake.

Drake and his employees continued to use and maintain the driveway without permission or

objection, although Drake knew it was located largely on Wright$$s property. In $1997,$ Wright sold

its lot to Robert Smersh. The next year, Smersh told Drake to stop using the driveway. Drake filed

a suit in a Washington state court against Smersh, claiming an easement by prescription $($which is

created by meeting the same requirements as adverse possession$).[$Drake v$.$ Smersh, $122$

Wash.App. $147,89$ P$\mathrm{.}3$d $726($Div$.12004)]$

a$)$ Does Drake$$s use of the driveway meet all of the requirements for adverse possession?

Explain.

b$)$ Adverse possession might seem unfair to the property owner. What is a reason to have this

doctrine$/$policy$?$