to allow an action after twenty years is but a statutory affirmation of our doctrine of prescription. Woodstock Iron Co. v. Roberts, 87 Ala. 436, 6 So. 349 [ (1888) ]. So sweeping is the principle of prescription that the presumption raised by it is not affected by proof of any disability such as non-age or coverture. Garrett v. Garrett, 69 Ala. 429 [ (1881) ]; Schwab v. Nonidez, 276 Ala. 308, 161 So.2d 592 [ (1964) ].” (Emphasis added.) See also Ellis v. Stickney, 253 Ala. 86, 94-95, 42 So.2d 779, 786 (1949) (recognizing that the 10-year limitations period prescribed in Title 7, § 20, Ala.Code 1940, the predecessor of § 6-2-33(2), Ala.Code 1975, did not come into operation until adverse possession was shown). See also Barrentine v. Parker, 236 Ala. 188, 190, 181 So. 263, 264-65 (1938) (<HOLDING>). In light of the foregoing, we agree with the
holding that although a mortgagor remains in the actual open possession of the mortgaged land without recognition of the debt or the existence of the mortgage as a valid claim but without a renunciation or disclaimer of the mortgagees right  for a period of twenty years from its maturity  he cannot defeat foreclosure proceedings begun within such twentyyear period holding in the context of the 90day period during which a plaintiff must bring suit after receiving a right to sue letter that in the absence of a recognized equitable consideration the court cannot extend the limitations period by even one day holding that a review committee of the kansas board for discipline of attorneys had the authority to dismiss a complaint against an attorney with or without prejudice and when dismissal was ordered without specifying the nature of the dismissal the dismissal was without prejudice to the filing of later proceedings on the same matter holding that because a disclaimer relates back to the decedents death the status of parties in the chain of succession are established as of the time of death regardless of when the disclaimer is made holding that the charge was timely when filed within the statute of limitations period even though served after the period