Re: Argh property rights debate
Hey BluffThis thanks for keeping the discussion alive. ou bring up good questions and I thought a lot about my answers.
[Quote] I) Are there any other qualifications/justifications for taking adverse possession other than abandonment? [\Unquote]
The only qualifications are the 5 necessary and sufficient conditions I listed my original post on adverse possession.
As to additional justifications, there are many, but most of them are the classic pro-property justifications you have heard before I suspect.
Some unique justifications include the interest in repose, or quiet enjoyment without people trying to take your [censored] all the time. That is, we want and expect people to grow roots and invest in their land. We build houses, plow fields, build roads, etc. Adverse possession protects these people from those with stale claims or “owners” that have sat on their rights and now wish to disturb and enrich themselves at the expense of the new users/possessors.
Imagine you bought property from some guy and built a house on it. You raised a family there, built fences, kept the place up, and have been there for a long time. Now what if it turns out that the guy who sold you the land was a con man and never owned it, and 30 years later some old dude comes by and says “hey wait I own the land GTFO I’m going to live here in your house now.” Adverse possession I think is a good balance on the level of security.
I can try to flesh these out even more but perhaps it would be better if I referred you to law review articles? We can debate this if you like.
[Quote] II) Can you please define abandonment? [\Unquote]
Abandonment is the failure to assert one’s ownership rights against a squatter or other invader of the property within a reasonable time.
If I move into your vacation home and claim it as my own, if you protest to me, eject me, or seek a legal remedy if available (courts/ the sheriff), then you have not abandoned your property.
But after a reasonable time has expired, you have sat on your rights and abandoned your ownership of the property, and can no longer claim the right to eject me and recover your property.
[Quote] III) Is there a limit on how much such "abandoned" property one may adversely possess *and* retain? [\Unquote]
Theoretically, no
In reality, certainly yes due to the 5 conditions I mentioned previously. You can only ACTUALLY possess and use a relatively small piece of property exclusively to others’ use AND continuously for a reasonable period. I mean even a rural farmer can only plow so many acres…
Nothing prevents me from selling my new ownership interest once I have acquired the property, however. Imagine a row of houses without owners. I move into one, adversely possess it for a reasonable time, then sell it, then move on to the next house.
[Quote] IV) What is the basis for determining the time period of either abandonment or adverse possession? [\Unquote]
The time period on both abandonment and adverse possession begins with the adverse possession. So for instance I own wilderness land and have not been there for 15 years. But you move in on my land in year 15. The previous 15 years do not count, only years starting after your adverse possession attempt count. So year 20 of me never going to the property is only year 5 of abandonment/adverse possession period.
I have been relying heavily on the idea of a “reasonable” time and I guess I have to be more precise. I am thinking of a short time for objects, like fruit trees, baskets, whatever goods you can take with you. I am thinking of a much longer time for land, like multiple years. In the U.S. we have a range between 5-30 years for land depending on your state but I think in practice we have to fix a point that may or may not be a little arbitrary…like we do for voting, or driving, or whatever. The time period has to be long enough for owners or potential owners to assert their ownership, but short enough that owners cannot sit on their rights indefinitely. It is a balance between protecting the owner’s security and the new possessor’s developed interest in the property.
|