Harry buys a piece of property from Parjit in rural California. Parjit owns 20 acres and he wishes to basically split the property and keep half of the total acreage for himself. In order to keep his 10 acres, Parjit subdivides his land and sells half to Harry. The access to Harry's new property is either over Parjit's retained land on an existing road or on a meandering, rutted, barely passable, back road through a public forest to a public road. He does not have Parjit's permission to cross Parjit's land on Parjit's road. After buying the subdivided piece of property, Harry builds a fence, inadvertently putting it about three feet over the property line on Parjit's retained piece of land. After the fence is completed, Harry realizes that it has been built too far over on Parjit's lot. He does not tell Parjit about the encroachment, but he does pay extra taxes to the county for the strip of property. Also, Harry, even though he has the back road, occasionally uses the access road across Parjit's land without permission. Harry's occasional use of the road goes on continuously for six years. Just before the end of six years, Parjit stops Harry one day and says, "Hey, I've seen you using my road without my permission. Since no harm has been done, I give you the right to use the road." In the seventh year since Harry bought his land, Parjit sells his 10 acres to Mike. Mike has a survey done and discovers the encroaching fence. He tells Harry to move the fence. He also sees Harry crossing his (Mike's) property and tells him to stop. Harry refuses both demands and keeps using the road hereafter. Lawsuits are filed by all parties against each other. Who should sue? What, if any, are the grounds for lawsuits? What are the defenses - both procedural and substantive - to any of the claims? What is the likely outcome f these actions?. What damages may be awarded?