This case, like the other one, is not even a legitimate adverse possession case. For her to make an adverse case, she would have to have proven that she had built the wall on the neighbor’s land, and defended it “openly” and “notoriously,” and had paid the taxes on the land and the wall for at least five years. Those findings are not noted.
Apparently, in Colorado, who pays the taxes is not relevant. The other couple mentioned in the article lost 1/3rd of their lot upon which they paid $16,000 per year plus HOA dues.
I don’t understand in this case how you use a wall openly and notoriously to the exclusion of its owner. The purpose of the wall was to mark the boundary. The owner’s were using it in that manner. How did the landgrabber trump that?