Foot paths don't often show in those pics, since they're no more than animal paths. I read the court doc, which was taken down from the link in #76. The aerial pics are n/g. The neighbors testified that the judge regularly did landscaping over those years on the property and the court noted, that it was the only access. Surveyors also noted the path.
"Second, the ethical complain should not have been heard by a friend. Rather the friend, the judge, should have recused himself personally. The matter should have been sent to another court where this perp had not worked previously."
I don't see a "perp". The court docs told me, that it was a solid case of adverse possession. You don't get to whine after you've been totally abscent for over 20 years in these cases, and the Kirlins definitely were.
Sorry for the perp part.
Can a path be enough or must there be a man made structure like a fence or a building ?