Question 1

In Tioga Coal Co. v. Supermarkets General Corp., what was the conclusion of the appellate court as to what was required to establish hostile intent for adverse possession?

Question 1 options:

a)	Hostile intent must be directly specifically at the true owner of the land.

b)	Hostile intent can be implied from the actions of the adverse possessor.

c)	Hostile intent is determined by the subjective state of mind of the adverse possessor.

d)	Tioga's mistaken encroachment does not constitute hostile intent.

Question 2 (2 points)

Saved

Which of the following are needed to satisfy the physical requirement for adverse possession?

Question 2 options:

a)	Notorious possession.

b)	Exclusive possession.

c)	Actual possession.

d)	All of the above.

Question 3 (2 points)

Saved

Which of the following correctly states the conclusion of the court in Marengo Cave Co. v. Ross?

Question 3 options:

a)	The appellant's use of the cave did not satisfy the physical requirement for adverse possession.

b)	Since the appellants were simply mistaken as to the boundary line between the properties, hostile intent is not established.

c)	Since the appellees knew that appellants were trespassing on their land, the appellant's occupation of the land was not adverse.

d)	The adverse occupation did not continue for a sufficient length of time to constitute adverse possession.

Question 4 (2 points)

Saved

In a majority of jurisdictions, which of the following disabilities will not toll the running of the statute of limitations for the purpose of adverse possession?

Question 4 options:

a)	At the time the adverse possession started, the true owner is currently serving in the army.