Adverse Possession: Camardo v. City of Auburn, et al.

Listen to this article

Supreme Court, Cayuga County

Adverse Possession

Actual & Exclusive Possession — Waste of Taxpayer Funds

Camardo v. City of Auburn, et al.
2011-0072
Judge Valentino

Background: The case arose out of an ownership dispute over a 1.9-foot strip of land over which a storage room was constructed and attached to the west wall of the defendant-city’s building and the east wall of the plaintiff’s building. Prior to the construction of the storage room, the defendant-Driscoll’s predecessors were granted a right of way. When Driscoll acquired the property, he entered into an agreement with the city allowing continued use of the strip. The controversy began when the city proposed demolishing the building. The plaintiff asserts numerous theories of adverse possession, obstruction of a right of way and waste of taxpayer funds cause of action. Upon notice to the parties, the court decided to treat the defendants’ motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment.

Ruling: The plaintiff has not demonstrated that he has had actual and exclusive possession of the disputed strip of land. The plaintiff’s assertion that the disputed strip of land reverts back to him, in the event of the prior covenants be invalidated merely suggest constructive possession. As to the right of way, the plaintiff has no right to a permanent injunction as the property dispute has been resolved. As to the plaintiff’s claims for waste of taxpayer funds, the plaintiff failed to allege the requisite elements of fraud, collusion, corruption or bad faith. The court held that the disputed property belongs to the city, that Driscoll was given an exclusive right to build or erect any structure on the right of way and the plaintiff’s preliminary injunction is vacated.

Carl DePalma for the plaintiff; Andrew S. Fusco, assistant corporation counsel, for defendant city, Matthew Gumaer for defendant Driscoll