With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". essential to a boundary by acquiescence claim. It is the existence of the facts supporting the elements of the doctrine, and not their clear and convincing exhibition before a court, that establishes title. See Colquhoun v. Webber, 684 A.2d 405, 410 (Me.1996); Mahoney v. Tara, LLC, 197 Vt. 412, 107 A.3d 887, 891 (2014) ("In other words, although an adverse party bears the burden of proving the elements of [the doctrine], ... her action, if successful, does not confer title but rather recognizes title vested independently of the judgment."). A high burden of proof has not prevented other courts from determining that title transferred by operation of law under the related doctrine of adverse possession. See, e.g., Celebration Worship Ctr., Inc. v. Tucker, 35 N.E.3d 251, 254-55 (Ind.2015) (<HOLDING>) by clear and convincing proof that the

A: holding that agreements established agency relationship
B: holding that a homeowner established
C: holding that homeowner plaintiff could not state a claim under the vcpa against manufacturer of the synthetic stucco sold to contractor who built and sold home to plaintiff
D: holding that the alien in that case had not established such circumstances
B.