The plaintiffs, members of the Lucas family, claimed ownership of land adjacent to their long-held family lot in Pejepscot Village, Topsham, by adverse possession. They argued they had continuously used and maintained the disputed land (referred to as within the “mow limits”) for over 70 years.

Key Facts:

• The Lucas property has been in the family since 1925 and is surrounded on three sides by land owned by the defendant (successive mill owners).
• Plaintiffs used the adjacent land for gardening, recreation, septic systems, and storage without interference from the mill owners.
• They claimed title to this additional land by adverse possession.

Trial Court Decision:

The court found that while the plaintiffs’ use of the land was actual, open, notorious, continuous, and exclusive for over 20 years, they failed to prove the use was “hostile and under a claim of right”, an essential element for adverse possession.

The court also denied plaintiffs’ mid-trial request to amend their complaint to add a claim for a prescriptive easement, ruling it would fail for the same reason—lack of evidence of hostile use or notice to the landowner.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine:

• Affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
• Rejected the argument that the court applied an improper legal standard or created a “company town exception.”
• Found no abuse of discretion in denying the motion to amend the complaint.
• Concluded that permissive use typical in “company towns” did not provide the kind of notice needed to establish hostile possession.

Conclusion:

Judgment for defendant affirmed. The Lucas family’s use of the disputed land, though long-standing, did not rise to the level of hostile possession required for adverse possession or a prescriptive easement.

Summary by ChatGPT