Cases from cite.case.law:

M. DADD, v. HOUDE,, 176 So. 3d 347 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . disputed strip by adverse possession up to the fence line, pursuant to the 1974 version of section 95.16 . . . ANALYSIS Section 95.16, as it appears today in the Florida Statutes, would compel affir-mance. . . . Rather, she redirects us to the earlier version of section 95.16, pursuant to which she contended below . . . Harpster, 403 So.2d 409, 411 (Fla.1981) (citing § 95.16, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1974)). . . . The 1987 amendment to section 95.16 of the Florida Statutes does not change this result. . . .

FRAZIER C. v. GOSZCZYNSKI,, 161 So. 3d 542 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . years under color of title (the wild deed) and that the property belonged to them pursuant to section 95.16 . . . Compare § 95.16, Fla. Stat. (2003) (adverse possession under color of title), with § 95.18, Fla. . . . We focus on the latter because the Fraziers make their claim under section 95.16. . . . From the text of section 95.16(1), we see that color of title references “a claim of title exclusive . . . of any other right” founded on a written instrument of conveyance. § 95.16(1), Fla. . . .

A. DELPIN APONTE, v. UNITED STATES,, 116 Fed. Cl. 5 (Fed. Cl. 2014)

. . . pay (2/3 x $213.03 = $142.02), the code 54 night differential ($64.38), the code 72 Sunday premium ($95.16 . . .

In TCI HOLDINGS, LLC,, 428 B.R. 117 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2010)

. . . . § 5:12-95.12 through 95.16. . . .

KLEIN, v. MEZA n,, 4 So. 3d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Alternatively, Meza claims that by virtue of the adverse possession statutes, sections 95.16 and 95.18 . . .

CANDLER HOLDINGS LIMITED I, v. WATCH OMEGA HOLDINGS, L. P., 947 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Under either section 95.16 or section 95.18, Florida Statutes (2003) “the possession of the real property . . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes (2003), addressing adverse possession under color of title, has not been . . .

MULLINS, v. COLBERT, J., 898 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . See §§ 95.16; 95.18, Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . Under color of title, a property is deemed possessed under the following circumstances: 95.16 Real property . . . county is to be considered as occupied for the same length of time as the part improved or cultivated. § 95.16 . . .

BUSH, Jr. S. v. A. GRASSWICK E., 830 So. 2d 963 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . In Seton the court considered a title claim based on adverse possession under section 95.16, Florida . . . The Setons’ adverse claim commenced in 1984 -under section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1975), which provided . . . ’ claim had not been perfected by adverse possession of seven years before the amendment of section 95.16 . . . Under section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1975), Mrs. . . . The amendment of section 95.16 in 1987 had no effect on her title so perfected, a vested right. . . .

J. GOSS R. W. v. H. DUNBAR,, 834 So. 2d 185 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 95.16, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . . See § 95.16(2), Fla. Stat. (2001). Mr. Dunbar’s theory does not depend upon these usual proofs. . . .

A. SANDERS W. v. H. THOMAS,, 821 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the owner of the disputed land through adverse possession under color of title, pursuant to section 95.16 . . . holding that defendants did not establish adverse possession by color of title because, under section 95.16 . . .

MAGMA TRADING CORPORATION, v. LINTZ,, 727 So. 2d 377 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . The court found that the appellees satisfied section 95.16, Florida Statutes, because they obtained title . . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes, reads in part: (1) When the occupant, or those under whom he claims, . . .

R. HIMEBAUGH, v. E. HUTTON,, 691 So. 2d 645 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See § 95.16, Fla. Stat. (1995); Mumaw v. Roberson, 60 So.2d 741 (Fla.1952); see also Enos v. . . .

L. B. McLEMORE, B. v. McLEMORE T. K. T., 675 So. 2d 202 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . . § 95.16(1), Fla.Stat. (1989); Seton v. Swann, 650 So.2d 35, 37 (Fla.1995). . . . The second step is concerned with the methods listed in section 95.16(2), by which a claimant may show . . . Appellants in this case predicated their adverse possession claim under color of title on section 95.16 . . .

SAPP, v. ANDERSON a k a W. a k a W., 673 So. 2d 569 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . dispute, we note that issue before us is whether the trial court properly applied the version of section 95.16 . . .

FLOURNOY, v. PERKINS, 667 So. 2d 364 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 95.16(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1993); Shultz v. . . . Johnson, 654 So.2d 567, 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (each essential element of adverse possession under § 95.16 . . . ) (in absence of some exercise of physical dominion over property, adverse possession under section 95.16 . . .

SHULTZ, v. F. JOHNSON,, 654 So. 2d 567 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1977). . . .

W. SETON, Jr. v. M. SWANN,, 650 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 1995)

. . . This ease concerns the interpretation of section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1991). . . . Under section 95.16, the title to property possessed but not described in a recorded instrument cannot . . . In reaching its conclusion, the district court reviewed the history of section 95.16. In Meyer v. . . . The Court also said that: By combining sections [95.16 and 95.17] the new statute clearly states that . . . See § 95.16(2)(c), Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

WHEELING DOLLAR BANK, v. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH,, 639 So. 2d 113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . The court denied the city’s claim for adverse possession under color of title pursuant to section 95.16 . . .

M. SWANN, a v. M. SETON, Jr., 629 So. 2d 935 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . adversely possessed the lands for the requisite period of time and met the requirements of section 95.16 . . . Earlier versions of section 95.16 were reviewed by the Florida supreme court in Meyer v. . . . 95.16(2)(b). . . . (2)(b) to section 95.16(2)(c). . . . Section 95.16(2)(b), Fla.Stat. (1974) stated: "... . . .

ALTMAN, J. B. C. A. D. W. H. v. CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORP. St. Co. a, 611 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . on a written instrument as being a conveyance of the property, or on a decree or judgment_” Section 95.16 . . .

STEPUTAT AND COMPANY, INC. v. S. BIDWELL,, 599 So. 2d 762 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . statutory authority, the final judgment indicates that the trial court based its decision upon section 95.16 . . . Under section 95.16(1), Florida Statutes (1991), at least two elements must be proved in the instant . . . applicable statutory prescription for acquiring title by adverse possession, in this case, section 95.16 . . .

Jo BAILEY, v. H. HAGLER, Jr., 575 So. 2d 679 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . that area is contiguous to the described land and [meets one of the criteria enumerated at section 95.16 . . . BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ., concur. . § 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1985), provides: 95.16 Real property actions; adverse . . .

Jo TURNER, v. T. VALENTINE M., 570 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Harpster, 403 So.2d 409 (Fla. 1981), which dealt with subsection 2(b) of section 95.16, Florida Statutes . . . legislative amendment had worked, the court said: By combining the two preceding sections, [former 95.16 . . . long as that area is contiguous to the described land and “protected by a substantial enclosure.” § 95.16 . . . Sed-don, they have additionally fulfilled one of the four possible criteria of 95.16(2), in this case . . .

M. FRANKLIN, v. E. GIBBS C., 507 So. 2d 690 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Although the appellees’ claim of adverse possession was with color of title pursuant to § 95.16, Fla.Stat . . . proceeded to trial in 1986, the Minchews cannot prevail on their claim of adverse possession under § 95.16 . . . None of the elements of § 95.16, Fla.Stat. have been satisfied, and the claim of adverse possession must . . .

BONIFAY v. GARNER,, 503 So. 2d 389 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . . § 95.16 Florida Statutes (1979). . . .

ELIZABETHAN DEVELOPMENT, INC. v. L. MAGWOOD, 479 So. 2d 251 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . However, under the interpretation placed upon section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1988), in Seddon plaintiffs . . . the chain link fence described above was not a “substantial enclosure” within the meaning of section 95.16 . . .

S. REVELS, v. SICO, INC. a, 468 So. 2d 481 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . plaintiff claims adverse possession by substantial enclosure pursuant to the interpretation of section 95.16 . . .

BONIFAY, v. E. DICKSON R., 459 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1977). . . .

BONIFAY, v. GARNER,, 445 So. 2d 597 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Florida, title to land may be acquired by adverse possession, either “under color of title,” Section 95.16 . . . question remains as to whether this possession was “under color of title” in conformance with Section 95.16 . . . simple title based on adverse possession must depend upon satisfaction of the requirements of Section 95.16 . . .

HOLLAND, v. J. M. HATTAWAY,, 438 So. 2d 456 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . sufficient to pass an after-acquired title; (3) as color of title under some statutes of limitation (see § 95.16 . . .

GASKIN, v. CARTER,, 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 177 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1983)

. . . Reference must also be made to Sections 95.16 and 95.18, Fla. Stat. (1979). 9. . . . Section 95.16, Fla. . . .

CRIGGER v. FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION,, 436 So. 2d 937 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . In Florida the legislature, by acts now embodied in sections 95.14 and 95.16, Florida Statutes (1981) . . .

W. KITZINGER V. v. GULF POWER COMPANY,, 432 So. 2d 188 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Sec. 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1981); see also Mumaw v. Roberson, 60 So.2d 741 (Fla.1952). . . . Sec. 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1981); see also Mumaw v. Roberson, supra, 60 So.2d at 743-44. . . . .

TOWNSEND, v. B. WARD,, 429 So. 2d 404 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . that theory and should be further limited to proving such possession before 1946 by virtue of Section 95.16 . . .

TATRA, INC. a v. H. SPENCER, 409 So. 2d 1172 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes (1977). As we stated in Moore v. . . .

T. DeROCHE M. v. J. WINSKI S., 409 So. 2d 41 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . The instrument relied upon to show color of title must be recorded (§ 95.16, Fla.Stat.) and it must purport . . .

SEDDON, v. HARPSTER, 403 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1981)

. . . The Defendant [Seddon] has not held such property according to the provisions of Section 95.16, Florida . . . Prior to that, Section 95.16 and 95.17 as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida in . . . The trial court refused to apply section 95.16, Florida Statutes (Supp.1974), retroactively because it . . . Section 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1973). (emphasis supplied). . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . Sections 11 and 12 of chapter 74-382 amended sections 95.16 and 95.17, Florida Statutes (1973). . . . . § 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1974 Supp.). . . . Section 95.16 provides: (1) When the occupant, or those under whom he claims, entered into possession . . . An examination of sections 95.16 and 95.-17, Florida Statutes (1973), together with the changes made . . . This construction of section 95.16 assures all property owners that there will be some notice of adverse . . .

AMERICAN CYANAMID COMPANY v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 2 Fla. Supp. 2d 67 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1981)

. . . The adverse possession statute, §95.16, Fla. . . . Stat. (1979), provides, in pertinent part, as follows: 95.16 Real property actions; adverse possession . . .

S. PASEKOFF L. a k a J. v. KAUFMAN,, 392 So. 2d 971 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . See, § 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1975). . . . note 4 supra, could not be effective as conferring “color of title” because it was not recorded, see § 95.16 . . .

T. BIRTLEY L. v. FERNANDEZ COMPANY, a, 392 So. 2d 291 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Section 95.16, Fla.Stat. (1972). . . .

P. GRANT S. v. STRICKLAND, 385 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . Griffin, 55 Fla. 560, 46 So. 635 (1908). .Section 95.18(2), and see § 95.16(2). . . . .

R. TURTURRO, R. v. SCHMIER,, 374 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . an individual interest in the property; (d) adverse possession under color of title, pursuant to § 95.16 . . .

L. COX, Jr. v. GAME E., 373 So. 2d 364 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . activities were sufficient acts of adverse possession under color of title to give them title under Section 95.16 . . .

SEDDON v. M. HARPSTER, 369 So. 2d 662 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . The Defendant has not held such property according to the provisions of Section 95.16, Florida Statutes . . . Prior to that, Section 95.16 and 95.17 as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the State of Florida in . . . At that time Section 95.16 read: Whenever it appears that the occupant, or those under whom he claims . . . The new version of Section 95.16 eliminates some of the statutory language relied upon by the supreme . . . Sections 95.16 and .17 as interpreted by Meyer v. . . .

WYMBS, v. ARVIDA CORPORATION, 48 Fla. Supp. 110 (Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct. 1978)

. . . Florida Statutes §95.16; Mumaw v. Roberson, 60 So.2d 741 (Fla. 1952); Munn v. . . . Stat. §95.16; Baugher v. Boley, 58 So. 980 (Fla. 1912); Wicker v. . . . Stat. §95.16. Adverse possession under Fla. . . . . §95.16 may be exercised against a public prescriptive right of the kind asserted here. Brooks v. . . .

CARTER, v. B. KLUGH,, 310 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . of proving the essential facts to establish adverse possession under color of title pursuant to §§ 95.16 . . . , 95.17, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., which read in part: “95.16 Real actions; adverse possession under color of . . . husbandry, or for the ordinary use of the occupant; or . . . ” [Emphasis Supplied] ****** With respect to § 95.16 . . .

ATES v. YELLOW PINE LAND COMPANY, HUMBLE OIL REFINING COMPANY St. v. ATES, 310 So. 2d 772 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . is settled law that a tax deed, whether valid or invalid, is color of title under Florida Statutes 95.16 . . .

RACE v. A. B. MOSELEY,, 308 So. 2d 137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . Yet, for purposes of § 95.16, we cannot tell whether this status existed for more than seven years prior . . .

PETERS, v. B. STRALEY, 306 So. 2d 588 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1975)

. . . entirely within the exclusive purview of the adverse possession statutes of the State of Florida, §§ 95.16 . . .

G. KERRIGAN S. v. THOMAS M., 281 So. 2d 410 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

. . . Secs. 95.16 and 95.17 of our statutes define adverse possession with color of title and Secs. 95.18 and . . . Sec. 95.16 provides: “Whenever it appears that the occupant, or those under whom he claims, entered into . . . be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of Sec. 95.16 . . .

E. MEYER L. v. F. LAW, Jr. W., 287 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1973)

. . . for conflict, clearly hold that without color of title or payment of taxes, as prescribed by Sections 95.16 . . . It should be noted that Section 95.16, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides that adverse possession commencing . . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes, 1971, provides : “Whenever it appears that the occupant, or those' under . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . Fla.Stat. § 95.16, F.S.A., deals with adverse possession under color of title, so that, to be given any . . .

E. MEYER L. v. F. LAW, Jr. W., 265 So. 2d 737 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . .

D. MADISON v. HAYNES, Jr. E., 264 So. 2d 852 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

. . . See F.S. 95.16 and 95.17, F.S.A., Laws of 1969. . . .

ARMSTRONG CORK COMPANY, a v. CROOK,, 227 So. 2d 64 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)

. . . Section 95.16, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides that when an occupant of premises enters into possession . . .

D. MADISON v. HAYNES, Jr. E., 220 So. 2d 44 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)

. . . Sections 95.16, 95.17, F.S.1965, F.S.A. . . .

SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a v. CALIFORNIA CHEMICAL COMPANY, a, 210 So. 2d 757 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1968)

. . . Sections 95.16 and 95.17, F.S.A.1967, since without benefit of these statutes defendant’s possession . . . J., and CROSS, J., concur. .“§95.16 Real actions; adverse possession under color of title; requirements . . . be premises included loithin the toritten instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . .

UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, IN BREVARD COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA, W. UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, IN BREVARD COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA, Lo- Je, a UNITED STATES v. ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, IN BREVARD COUNTY, STATE OF FLORIDA, W., 307 F. Supp. 34 (M.D. Fla. 1968)

. . . F.S.. 95.16, F.S.A.; F.S. 95.17, F.S.A. . . .

BROWN, v. FLOYD,, 202 So. 2d 215 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . . § 95.16, F.S.A. . . .

MOORE, v. MUSA D. M., 198 So. 2d 843 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . evidence fully satisfies the statutory requirements for adverse possession under color of title, §§ 95.16 . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . .

CAHILL, v. W. CHESLEY J., 189 So. 2d 818 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

. . . . § 95.16 or § 95.23, F.S.A., from now asserting their claim against the property. . . . Section 95.16, F.S.A. likewise is without application. The property was the homestead of Sanborn. . . .

KELLEY v. CITY OF COCOA, a, 188 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

. . . . § 95.16. . . .

LUCOM C. v. ATLANTIC NATIONAL BANK OF WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA,, 354 F.2d 51 (5th Cir. 1965)

. . . . § 95.16. . Ma.Stat.Ann. § 732.30. . Ma.Stat.Ann. § 732.28. . . . .

TIDEWATER OIL COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES, 168 Ct. Cl. 457 (Ct. Cl. 1964)

. . . the daily average production of well No. 2 was 16.80 barrels of oil and 330.20 barrels of water, or 95.16 . . .

W. E. KISER A. v. J. M. HOWARD,, 133 So. 2d 746 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . F.S. § 95.16, F.S.A. . F.S. § 95.18, F.S.A. . Palmquist v. Johnson, Fla.1949, 41 So.2d 313. . . .

SIMPSON B. Jr. v. LINDGREN, 133 So. 2d 439 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . amended complaint claims, ■and the final decree awards title to the Lindgrens upon the basis of Section 95.16 . . . Wares to the Lindgrens did not constitute color of title essential for adverse possession under Section 95.16 . . .

LUBRANO v. R. J. MACAULEY, 125 So. 2d 911 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . . § 95.16. Finding no error in the verdict and judgment of the trial court, the same are affirmed. . . .

E. BLACKBURN M. v. FLORIDA WEST COAST LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 109 So. 2d 413 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1959)

. . . 95.17(2), F.S.A., defining possession and occupation under color of title, brings them within section 95.16 . . . to be premises included within the written instrument, judgment, or decree, within the purview of § 95.16 . . . S. § 95.16, F.S.A., with color of title, and the payment of taxes required under § 95.18, where there . . .

R. BOYD B. v. EVANS PROPERTIES, a, 104 So. 2d 109 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1958)

. . . Florida Statute, Chapter 95.16, 95.17, 95.18 and 95.21, apply as to adverse possession and payment of . . .

H. STEPHENS M. Sr. Jr. v. STEPHENS, a, 94 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 1957)

. . . . § 95.16, F.S.A. . . .

MORRISON v. BYRD, 72 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1954)

. . . The statute governing the question before the lower court is Section 95.16, Florida Statutes 1951, F.S.A . . . title by adverse possession under color of title in the appellant within the provisions of Sections 95.16 . . .

B. H. CARLTON v. ETHEL ELARBEE, 154 Fla. 301 (Fla. 1944)

. . . Sec. 95.16 F.S. 41, F.S.A. . . .