Collins v. King, [Ms. SC-2023-0492, Mar. 22, 2024] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2024). The Court (Mitchell, J.; Parker, C.J., and Shaw, Bryan, and Mendheim, JJ., concur) affirms the Cullman Circuit Court’s judgment holding that Collins failed to demonstrate that his predecessors adversely possessed a portion of his neighbor’s land by prescription or agreement.
The Court first reiterates that “coterminous landowners may alter the boundary line between their properties either ‘by agreement plus possession for ten years’ or by adverse possession by prescription for a period of 10 – rather than 20 – years.” Ms. * 7, quoting Robinson v. Hamilton, 496 So. 2d 8, 10 (Ala. 1986). On ore tenus review, the Court affirms, holding that Collins failed to meet his burden of proof demonstrating adverse possession of the disputed strip by either agreement or prescription. Ms. *9.