If nothing else, this should fail on the “exclusive” part. Can they demonstrate that for the statutory period of time, the real owners were prevented from using that part of their own land. They bear the burden of proof, and no I don’t think so.
To me the whole claim sounds very frivolous.
It’s frivolous, but it’s also very expensive. So far the Kirlins have shelled out $120,000 and they will probably spent close to a quarter million on appeal. Mr. Kirlin can kiss his USAirways pilot’s salary goodbye!