A. Che has acquired title by adverse possession.
B. Che cannot claim title as an adverse possessor since he never entered with hostile intent.
C. Che is in adverse possession but does not hold title, since Cedric's incompetence 15 year ago stopped the possession clock from running.
D. None of the above
ANSWER: A. This is a simple adverse possession case. Che had title due to his open, exclusive, continuous, and hostile use for a period longer then the statute. Since Cedric did nothing to eject Che during the running period of the statute, title to the property vests in the possessor, and the owner is barred from suing for ejectment. An adverse possession claim requires: 1) open and notorious use, 2) actual and exclusive use, 3) continuous use throughout the statutory period and 4) the possessor must occupy the property and enter without the owner's permission. Here, Che has met all of these requirements.
B is incorrect. Hostile intent merely requires a possessor to take possession of the land without permission of the true initial owner, which results in a loss of Cedric's rights.
C is incorrect. The only time in which the statute of limitations for adverse possession would be tolled is if the true initial owner is mentally incompetent when the possessor initially takes the land. Here, Cedric's mental illness occurred years after Che initially took possession.
D is incorrect in light of the correct answer. Answer A clearly and accurately states that Che has taken right and title by adverse possession.