What are the elements necessary to sustain a claim of adverse possession?

'In Stanley v. Westover, 93 Cal.App. 97, 269 Pac. 468, 473, the court said: 'One of the elements necessary to constitute adverse possession is that the adverse claimant must have been in the actual possession of the real property for a continuous period of five years.'

'In Eddy v. Demichelis, 100 Cal.App. 517, 280 Pac. 389, 390, it is said: 'The presumption of ownership is with the paper title. Clear evidence is necessary to overcome this presumption. The adverse claim of right must not only exist in the mind of the claimant, but must be proven to have been communicated in some way to the owner so that his failure to object may be taken against him as an acknowledgment of or

Page 488

'Proof of occasional occupancy is not sufficient to [184 Cal.App.2d 226] establish a title by adverse possession. Maginnis v. Hurlbutt, 49 Cal.App. 460, 193 Pac. 606. In Huling v. Seccombe, 88 Cal.App. 238, 263 Pac. 362, it was held that the occasional cutting of wild grass or weeds was not sufficient proof of occupancy or possession upon which to base a claim of adverse possession. In Weyse v. Biedebach, 86 Cal.App. 736, 261 Pac. 1092, 1095, evidence to the effect that the appellant had posted upon the property a notice bearing his name and address with the word 'owner' thereon, that he had paid all taxes, and that he had removed from the premises a tank with the oil contained therein, was held not sufficient to show the required occupancy or possession. In that case the court said: 'But to sustain a title by adverse possession it is incumbent upon the claimant to show actual, continued occupation and possession for a period of five years, in addition to the payment of state, county, and municipal taxes levied and assessed upon the property. Code Civ.Proc., 322, 323, 325.''