When is tacking not permitted in adverse possession?

Tacking, which allows a subsequent possessor to combine their period of possession with that of a prior possessor to satisfy the statutory period for adverse possession, is not permitted in cases of ouster. Ouster occurs when the previous possessor is physically removed or denied access to the property by the new possessor. This act of ouster breaks the continuity of possession necessary for tacking because it indicates a clear break in the chain of possession.

Under adverse possession laws, a claim requires that the possession be continuous and uninterrupted, along with other elements like open and notorious use, exclusivity, and adverse nature of the possession. When there is an ouster, the original possessor's claim is interrupted, making it impossible for the new possessor to tack onto the original period of possession. This interruption is crucial, as tacking relies on uninterrupted possession to fulfill the required length of time in order to establish a legal claim to the property.

Other options do not necessarily impact the ability to tack. For instance, an agreement to share possession does not negate the ability to tack if the possession was adverse and continuous. Similarly, the existence of a recorded real covenant or the transfer of ownership by the original possessor under certain circumstances do not automatically preclude