Under which doctrine might a person lose property ownership if they imply an incorrect boundary?

The doctrine that applies in this context is estoppel, specifically equitable estoppel. This legal principle prevents a party from asserting a claim or right when their past conduct has led another party to reasonably rely on that conduct to their detriment. In the case of property boundaries, if a person implies a boundary that is incorrect—perhaps by acting in a way that suggests a certain boundary exists and allowing another person to rely on that—estoppel can come into play. The property owner may be prohibited from later claiming a different boundary, as doing so would unfairly disadvantage the party who relied on the implied boundary.

Estoppel focuses on the conduct and representations of parties and their reliance. For example, if a property owner allows a neighbor to build a fence based on an assumed boundary line, the property owner may later find themselves unable to challenge that boundary if the neighbor has relied on that assumption and made improvements accordingly. This promotes fairness and stability in property ownership and boundaries.

In contrast, adverse possession typically requires a longer period of possession with the intent to claim the property as one's own and doesn’t necessarily involve misleading others based on incorrect boundaries. Recognition and acquiescence relates to parties agreeing to existing boundaries but does not inherently involve misrepresentation or reliance by one party