The Solomans own a cabin on the south side of Mount Henry. The Solomans told Silvan and Miyu they could live in the cabin and use it as they wished until the Solomans want to use it again. Twelve years later, the Solomans informed Silvan and Miyu that they were going to spend the summer at the cabin and that Silvan and Miyu would have to make other arrangements for the summer. Silvan and Miyu claimed that they had acquired title by adverse possession because they had occupied the property for the period of time required for adverse possession under state law (10 years in that state). Are Silvan and Miyu correct?

Question 20 options:

a) Yes, Silvan and Miyu were living on the property with exclusive, open possession for a continuous period of time for the required 10 years.

b) Yes, Silvan and Miyu had the Solomans' permission; therefore, the possession was not illegal.

c) No, Silvan and Miyu's possession was with the Solomans' permission; and therefore, the claim was not adverse to the Solomans.

d) No, there was no warranty deed transferred to Silvan and Miyu.