QUESTION demonstrate actual use of the property in order

QUESTION 22Use the following information to prepare a rule that can be applied to the facts below. Then, analyze the case using the proper format:Your client, the plaintiff, dug a well on the defendant’s property.  The plaintiff claims he owns the land through adverse possession.  In this jurisdiction, adverse possession is a legal doctrine that awards ownership of property to a possessor who openly, actually, exclusively, adversely, notoriously, and continuously possesses the land of another for twenty years.  The only issue in your case is whether your client can establish that he actually used the property—one element of adverse possession.  You find the following opinions:CASE 1:  The plaintiff has not shown adverse possession of the defendant’s property because she failed to satisfy the actual use element.  Adverse possessors must demonstrate actual use of the property in order to establish ownership through adverse possession.  Actual use is demonstrated by acts of dominion and control by the adverse possessor.  Here, the plaintiff placed a picnic table and shade umbrella on the defendant’s property.  This use did not establish dominion and control because the objects could be easily removed from the property.CASE 2:  The plaintiff has demonstrated ownership of the property through adverse possession.  Adverse possession is established when an adverse possessor demonstrates dominion and control over the contested property.  The plaintiff built a three-story brick house on an unused portion of defendant’s property.  This structure did show dominion and control over defendant’s property.CASE 3:  The plaintiff has established adverse possession.  The adverse possessor must show actual use of the adversely possessed property.  Actual use is best shown by evidence of dominion and control over the property.  The plaintiff built an in-ground swimming pool on the locus and placed numerous beach chairs around the perimeter of the pool.  While the beach chairs are not evidence of dominion and control, the in-ground pool is evidence of dominion and control.Based on the above cases, please write a rule statement that synthesizes all three cases. Then, draft a concise legal analysis that answers the follow question/issue: “Can your client establish that he actually used the property?”  Why or why not? (No more than 10 sentences.)