Cooley v. McRae

• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: HUNSTEIN, Justice.
• Citation: Cooley v. McRae, 275 Ga. 435, 569 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. 2002)
• Decision Date: 16 September 2002
• Docket Number: No. S02A0679.,S02A0679.
• Parties: COOLEY et al. v. McRAE.

569 S.E.2d 845

275 Ga. 435

COOLEY et al. v. McRAE.

No. S02A0679.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

September 16, 2002.

Capers, Dunbar, Sanders & Bruckner, Ziva Peleg Bruckner, E. Freddie Sanders, for appellant.

Scott J. Klosinski, PC, James Carlisle Overstreet, Jr., Augusta, Fowler & Wills, John P. Wills, Thomson, for appellee.

HUNSTEIN, Justice.

Appellee Robert McRae, as the executor for the estate of his mother, Marguerite M. McRae, brought this quiet title action based on a claim of adverse possession. See OCGA § 23-3-60 et seq.; OCGA § 44-5-161. At issue is title to approximately 220 acres of real property in Burke County, Georgia. Appellants Betty Daniel Cooley, L.M. Wade, Robert Stevenson, and Clarence Stevenson are the children of Sallie Mae Wade. They claim their mother received title to the property in 1911 and remained titleholder until her death in 1985, at which time they inherited her interest in the property. Appellee contends that T.W. Radford, the brother of Sallie Mae Wade and father of Marguerite McRae, acquired title to the property through adverse possession.¹ The case was assigned to a special master who conducted a hearing and filed findings of fact and conclusions of law based on the evidence presented. The trial court adopted the special master's findings and conclusions and entered judgment in favor of McRae. Because the evidence supports the trial court's determination that Radford and McRae acquired prescriptive title by adverse possession under OCGA § 44-5-161(a), we affirm.

To establish title by adverse possession, whether by twenty years or seven years under color of title, a party must show possession not originated in fraud that is public, continuous, exclusive, uninterrupted and peaceable, and accompanied by a claim of right. OCGA § 44-5-161(a). "[I]n an action to quiet title brought under OCGA § 23-3-60 et seq., the findings of the Special Master and adopted by the trial court will be upheld unless clearly erroneous." Seignious v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 252 Ga. 69, 71, 311 S.E.2d 808 (1984) (parenthetical omitted). If there is any evidence to support the trial court's judgment, it will not be disturbed on appeal. Nebb v. Butler, 257 Ga. 145, 357 S.E.2d 257 (1987).

Appellants argue that the trial court erred in granting the petition to quiet title because there was insufficient evidence that the Radford and McRae families were in possession of the property. We disagree. The record demonstrates that Radford and his lineal descendants continuously occupied the property and openly declared to others that they owned the property from at least 1950. In 1951 Radford sold timber rights on the property to O.B. Poole, who timbered portions of the property in 1951 and 1952. Poole testified that throughout the 1950s and 1960s he and his family used the property for recreational purposes with the express permission of Radford and in an honest belief that the property was owned by Radford. Since at least 1965, Radford and his descendants have regularly hunted on the property, cultivated the land, and constructed and maintained roads, fences and gates on the property. "No Trespassing" signs were frequently posted and replaced on the property and trespassers were run off the property when discovered by family members. One of Marguerite McRae's sons testified that he has visited the property almost daily since the late 1970s, and her...