Rhode Island Adverse Possession Lawyers

Adverse Possession, Boundary Disputes & Property Ownership Litigation

The Rhode Island adverse possession lawyers at Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represent property owners in disputes involving adverse possession, boundary lines, encroachments, prescriptive easements, quiet title actions, and competing claims of ownership. Our attorneys represent clients seeking to establish ownership of disputed land as well as property owners defending against adverse possession claims.

Adverse possession disputes frequently arise when the legal boundaries reflected in recorded deeds and surveys differ from the manner in which land has actually been occupied, maintained, or improved for many years. These disputes may involve fences, driveways, landscaping, retaining walls, garages, structures, or portions of adjoining parcels that have been treated as part of another owner’s property.

Rhode Island law recognizes that ownership of real estate may, under certain circumstances, be acquired through adverse possession. However, establishing such a claim requires satisfaction of specific legal requirements and proof by clear and convincing evidence.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC has substantial experience representing clients in contested real estate litigation, including successfully arguing an important adverse possession appeal before the Rhode Island Supreme Court.

Our attorneys represent clients throughout Rhode Island, with legal practices also serving Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Bilodeau Capalbo’s Successful Rhode Island Supreme Court Appeal in Foisy

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represented the property owners in The Union Cemetery Burial Society of North Smithfield v. Foisy, 292 A.3d 1205 (R.I. 2023), an important Rhode Island Supreme Court decision addressing the requirements for establishing adverse possession.

Attorney Ryanna T. Capalbo argued the appeal on behalf of the defendants, John and Donna Foisy.

The litigation involved two disputed portions of property adjoining land owned by the Union Cemetery Burial Society of North Smithfield. The Foisys asserted adverse possession based upon longstanding occupation, maintenance, and use of the disputed areas.

Following a trial, the Rhode Island Superior Court rejected the Foisys’ adverse possession claims.

Bilodeau Capalbo appealed that judgment to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.

On May 10, 2023, the Supreme Court vacated the Superior Court’s judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

The Court determined that the trial justice had committed reversible error in evaluating the evidence concerning actual, continuous, open, and notorious possession of the northern encroachment.

The Court also determined that the Foisys had established by clear and convincing evidence that their use and possession of the eastern encroachment were sufficiently open and notorious.

The Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings concerning the hostile and exclusive elements of adverse possession, which were not finally resolved in the appellate decision.

The decision is significant because it addresses the evaluation of historical property use, the evidence necessary to establish visible possession, and the application of Rhode Island’s adverse possession requirements.

Foisy Continues to Be Cited by the Rhode Island Supreme Court

The Foisy decision has subsequently been cited in Rhode Island Supreme Court decisions addressing adverse possession and related property rights, including:

• O’Keefe v. York, 308 A.3d 983 (R.I. 2024).
• Urbonas v. Gullison, 337 A.3d 673 (R.I. 2025).
• Blechman v. Woodward, 352 A.3d 157 (R.I. 2026).
• Desrochers v. Micheli, 357 A.3d 1048 (R.I. 2026).

These decisions address important issues involving possession, hostility, cotenancy, prescriptive easements, and boundary disputes.

Bilodeau Capalbo’s appellate representation in Foisy demonstrates the firm’s experience litigating complex property ownership claims and addressing the evidentiary standards governing adverse possession.

For a detailed discussion of the case and subsequent Rhode Island Supreme Court decisions, read our article:

Rhode Island Adverse Possession Law: The Supreme Court’s Foisy Decision and What Property Owners Should Know.

You may also review the Rhode Island Supreme Court’s published Foisy opinion.

What Is Adverse Possession Under Rhode Island Law?

Adverse possession is a legal doctrine under which a person may acquire ownership of real property through possession that satisfies the requirements established by statute and Rhode Island Supreme Court precedent.

The principal statute governing adverse possession is R.I. Gen. Laws § 34-7-1.

Rhode Island generally requires ten years of qualifying possession before ownership may be acquired through adverse possession.

A claimant must establish actual, open, notorious, hostile, continuous, and exclusive possession under a claim of right for at least ten years.

Each element must be established by clear and convincing evidence.

The legal analysis depends upon the nature of the disputed land, the character of the claimant’s activities, the duration of possession, and the circumstances surrounding the parties’ use of the property.

Importantly, a person claiming adverse possession does not necessarily need to have occupied the property with knowledge that it belonged to someone else.

The relevant question is whether the claimant’s possession satisfies the applicable legal requirements.

The Legal Requirements for Adverse Possession in Rhode Island

Actual Possession

Actual possession requires physical occupation or use of the disputed property consistent with the nature and character of the land.

The conduct necessary to establish actual possession may vary depending upon whether the disputed property is a residential yard, wooded parcel, driveway, agricultural area, or other type of land.

Relevant activities may include maintaining the property, constructing improvements, fencing, landscaping, storing materials, or otherwise exercising control over the land.

Whether particular activities establish actual possession depends upon the surrounding circumstances and the evidence presented.

Open and Notorious Possession

Open and notorious possession concerns whether the claimant’s use of the property was sufficiently apparent to place the record owner on notice of the adverse claim.

The law does not necessarily require proof that the record owner actually observed every activity occurring on the property.

Rather, the inquiry concerns the character and visibility of the possession.

In Foisy, the Rhode Island Supreme Court examined evidence concerning longstanding storage activities, landscaping, vegetation management, fencing, and other uses of disputed land.

The Court’s analysis demonstrates that the nature of the property and the surrounding circumstances are important when determining whether possession was sufficiently open and notorious.

Hostile Possession Under a Claim of Right

The requirement of hostility does not mean that the claimant must act aggressively or engage in a personal dispute with the property owner.

In the context of adverse possession, hostility generally concerns whether possession is inconsistent with the rights of the record owner and occurs without the owner’s permission.

Possession authorized by the record owner ordinarily does not satisfy the hostility requirement while that permission remains operative.

In Blechman v. Woodward, 352 A.3d 157 (R.I. 2026), the Rhode Island Supreme Court addressed the significance of acknowledging another person’s superior ownership rights and offering to purchase disputed property.

These circumstances may be important when determining whether possession was hostile.

Similarly, Desrochers v. Micheli, 357 A.3d 1048 (R.I. 2026), addressed the effect of permissive use upon an adverse possession claim.

The existence, continuation, or withdrawal of permission can therefore become a central issue in litigation.

Continuous Possession

The claimant must establish qualifying possession throughout the required statutory period.

Continuous possession does not necessarily require physical presence on the property every day.

The inquiry concerns whether the claimant’s possession and use were sufficiently continuous in light of the nature of the property and the activities ordinarily associated with its use.

Historical evidence, including photographs, municipal records, testimony from neighbors, and records of improvements, may be relevant.

Exclusive Possession

Exclusive possession concerns whether the claimant exercised possession in a manner consistent with an ownership claim rather than merely sharing possession with the record owner.

The required showing depends upon the circumstances and the relationship between the parties.

Special considerations may apply when a claimant seeks to establish adverse possession against another cotenant.

In O’Keefe v. York, 308 A.3d 983 (R.I. 2024), the Rhode Island Supreme Court addressed the heightened requirements applicable to adverse possession claims involving cotenants.

Clear and Convincing Evidence

Rhode Island requires adverse possession claimants to establish the necessary elements through clear and convincing evidence.

This standard is more demanding than the ordinary preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applicable to many civil claims.

The strength, consistency, and credibility of historical evidence can therefore be particularly important.

Our attorneys evaluate the available documentation and testimony to determine whether the evidence supports the required elements or provides a basis to challenge an adverse possession claim.

The Ten-Year Requirement and Tacking of Possession

Rhode Island’s adverse possession statute generally establishes a ten-year period of qualifying possession.

However, the current property owner does not necessarily need to have personally occupied the disputed land for the entire period.

Under appropriate circumstances, a claimant may rely upon qualifying possession by a predecessor in title through the doctrine of tacking.

Tacking can be particularly important where property has remained in a family for generations or has been transferred between successive owners who continued using the same disputed area.

The availability of tacking depends upon the relationship between successive possessors and satisfaction of the applicable legal requirements.

The Rhode Island Supreme Court discussed tacking in Foisy, recognizing that qualifying periods of possession by predecessors may be relevant to determining whether the statutory period has been satisfied.

A related principle is that title acquired through completed adverse possession may vest by operation of law once the required elements have been satisfied for the statutory period.

A subsequent court proceeding may be necessary to establish that ownership judicially and resolve the public title record.

Adverse Possession Involving Fences, Driveways, Landscaping & Structures

Many adverse possession disputes begin when a property owner obtains a survey and discovers that the recorded boundary differs from the location of existing improvements.

Common situations include fences constructed beyond a deeded boundary, driveways extending onto neighboring property, landscaping maintained across a property line, and structures partially located on an adjoining parcel.

These circumstances may raise questions concerning adverse possession, prescriptive easements, boundary by acquiescence, encroachments, and trespass.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represents clients in disputes involving:

• Residential fences and longstanding property boundaries.
• Driveways, access roads, and parking areas.
• Garages, sheds, retaining walls, and other improvements.
• Landscaping, lawns, gardens, and maintained land.
• Wooded parcels and undeveloped property.
• Historical subdivision boundaries and recorded plans.
• Encroachments discovered during real estate transactions.
• Disputed portions of commercial and residential property.

Our attorneys review surveys, deeds, historical records, photographs, and evidence of property use to evaluate ownership claims and available legal remedies.

Defending Against an Adverse Possession Claim

Property owners may face adverse possession claims when neighbors or other parties assert ownership over land reflected in the owner’s deed.

Defending these claims requires careful analysis of the claimant’s conduct and the evidence concerning possession over the statutory period.

Potential defenses may involve challenging whether possession was sufficiently open, notorious, hostile, continuous, or exclusive.

Evidence of permission, interruptions in possession, inconsistent ownership claims, or the absence of qualifying possession may be relevant.

The record owner’s conduct and communications with the claimant may also affect the analysis.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represents property owners defending against adverse possession claims and seeking to establish or protect their recorded ownership rights.

Depending upon the circumstances, available remedies may include declaratory judgments, quiet title actions, injunctions, and other appropriate relief.

Adverse Possession Versus Prescriptive Easements

Adverse possession and prescriptive easements are related but distinct legal doctrines.

Adverse possession concerns the acquisition of ownership of land through qualifying possession.

A prescriptive easement generally concerns the acquisition of a legally enforceable right to use another person’s property for a particular purpose without acquiring ownership of the underlying land.

For example, longstanding use of a driveway or pathway may present a prescriptive easement issue rather than a claim to ownership of the land itself.

Determining the appropriate claim requires examination of the historical use, the nature of the asserted right, and the applicable legal requirements.

Our attorneys represent clients in disputes involving both adverse possession and prescriptive easements.

Learn more about our Rhode Island Easements Practice.

Boundary by Acquiescence

Rhode Island also recognizes the doctrine of boundary by acquiescence.

This doctrine may apply when adjoining property owners have recognized and accepted a particular boundary for the legally required period.

Boundary by acquiescence differs from adverse possession because it concerns the recognition of a boundary rather than necessarily requiring proof of every element associated with adverse possession.

Disputes may involve longstanding fences, walls, landscaping features, or other visible markers treated by adjoining owners as establishing the property line.

The Rhode Island Supreme Court addressed boundary by acquiescence in Urbonas v. Gullison, 337 A.3d 673 (R.I. 2025), and Blechman v. Woodward, 352 A.3d 157 (R.I. 2026).

Our attorneys evaluate whether the evidence supports a boundary by acquiescence claim, an adverse possession claim, a prescriptive easement, or another property rights theory.

Quiet Title Actions and Establishing Ownership

Adverse possession disputes frequently require judicial proceedings to establish the legal ownership of disputed property.

A quiet title action may provide a means of resolving competing claims and obtaining a judicial determination of property rights.

These proceedings can involve conflicting deeds, disputed boundaries, adverse possession claims, easements, and other title-related issues.

Our attorneys represent property owners seeking to establish ownership through adverse possession and defend clients against claims that threaten their recorded property interests.

The appropriate form of relief depends upon the nature of the competing claims and the applicable law.

For additional information, visit our Real Estate Litigation Practice.

Evidence That Can Be Important in Adverse Possession Litigation

Adverse possession cases frequently depend upon historical evidence extending back ten years or longer.

The available evidence may include recorded deeds, surveys, aerial photographs, municipal records, property tax documents, building permits, correspondence, historical photographs, and witness testimony.

Evidence concerning the location of fences, structures, driveways, landscaping, or other improvements may also be significant.

In some disputes, testimony from prior owners, neighbors, contractors, surveyors, or municipal officials may help establish the nature and duration of possession.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC evaluates the available evidence and works with appropriate professionals when necessary to investigate property boundaries, historical land use, and disputed ownership claims.

Our firm’s appellate representation in Foisy demonstrates the importance of careful evidentiary analysis in adverse possession litigation.

Why Choose Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC for Rhode Island Adverse Possession Litigation?

Adverse possession disputes require an understanding of Rhode Island property law, statutory requirements, historical land records, survey evidence, and civil litigation procedures.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC combines real estate litigation experience with knowledge of property ownership, easements, boundary disputes, construction-related property issues, and title litigation.

Our firm’s successful representation before the Rhode Island Supreme Court in Foisy provides a concrete example of our experience litigating complex adverse possession claims.

We recognize that these disputes may involve valuable property interests, longstanding improvements, access rights, and uncertainty concerning the legal boundaries of real estate.

Our attorneys approach these matters through careful factual investigation, analysis of the governing legal standards, and evaluation of available claims and defenses.

We represent clients seeking to establish adverse possession as well as property owners defending their ownership rights.

Our objective is to provide informed legal advice and effective representation tailored to the circumstances of each dispute.

Rhode Island Adverse Possession Representation

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represents property owners throughout Rhode Island in adverse possession, boundary disputes, prescriptive easement claims, quiet title actions, and related real estate litigation.

Our attorneys also maintain practices in Massachusetts and Connecticut, where property ownership disputes are governed by the applicable laws of those jurisdictions.

Because adverse possession requirements differ among states, the legal analysis must account for the jurisdiction in which the disputed property is located.

Rhode Island Adverse Possession Litigation and Property Boundary Disputes

Adverse possession claims frequently arise from longstanding disagreements between neighboring property owners concerning fences, driveways, landscaping, access roads, structures, and other improvements located on or near disputed property boundaries. These disputes can involve competing claims of ownership, historical property use, surveys, deeds, and evidence concerning possession extending over many years.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represents property owners in adverse possession litigation and related real estate disputes throughout Rhode Island. Our attorneys evaluate the history of possession, the conduct of the parties and their predecessors, recorded instruments, surveys, historical photographs, and other evidence relevant to establishing or defending claims of ownership.

Our Rhode Island Real Estate Litigation Practice includes disputes involving adverse possession, prescriptive easements, boundary disagreements, quiet title actions, encroachments, and competing claims to real property. Depending on the circumstances, a dispute may require declaratory relief, injunctive relief, or a judicial determination of ownership.

Rhode Island Supreme Court Experience — Union Cemetery Burial Society v. Foisy

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC’s attorneys have experience handling adverse possession matters at both the trial and appellate levels, including the Rhode Island Supreme Court proceedings in Union Cemetery Burial Society of Newport v. Foisy.

The Foisy litigation addressed significant questions concerning adverse possession and the legal requirements for establishing ownership through possession of another person’s property. The decision is particularly relevant to Rhode Island property owners involved in disputes over longstanding use and possession of land.

Our firm has published a more detailed discussion of the decision and its implications for property owners. Read our article, Rhode Island Adverse Possession and the Foisy Decision, for additional information concerning the case and Rhode Island adverse possession law.

Adverse Possession Claims Arising From Real Estate Transactions

Adverse possession issues may also arise during the purchase, sale, financing, or development of residential and commercial property. A survey or title examination may reveal that a fence, driveway, retaining wall, septic system, or other improvement occupies land owned of record by another party.

These circumstances may create disputes concerning marketable title, ownership rights, access, encroachments, and the ability to convey or finance the property.

Our attorneys assist clients in evaluating these issues in connection with Rhode Island Real Estate Law and Property Transactions, including the relationship between recorded title, historical possession, property surveys, and potential litigation.

Where appropriate, our attorneys work with surveyors, title professionals, engineers, and other qualified experts to investigate disputed property boundaries and develop the evidence necessary to support or defend an adverse possession claim.

Speak With a Rhode Island Adverse Possession Lawyer

Adverse possession disputes can involve substantial property rights and complex factual histories. Whether you are seeking to establish ownership of property through longstanding possession or defending against another party’s adverse possession claim, a careful evaluation of the evidence and applicable Rhode Island law is essential.

Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC represents property owners in adverse possession claims, boundary disputes, easement litigation, and related real estate controversies. Our attorneys provide representation in negotiations, litigation, and appeals where appropriate.

Contact Bilodeau Capalbo, LLC at 401-300-4055 to discuss your property dispute and available legal options.