Posted on 11/14/2007 10:26:59 PM PST by beaversmom
A judge has ruled in favor of another judge – now retired – in an unusual "adverse possession" land dispute in pricey Boulder, Colo., giving the retired judge a large part of his neighbor's $1 million parcel of land for a pathway to his backyard.
The recent ruling came from James Klein a judge in Colorado's 20th Judicial District covering Boulder, and was in favor of Richard McLean, who retired from the judiciary in Boulder several years ago.
The loser in the case was Boulder resident Don Kirlin, who is publicizing his situation on the landgrabber.org website. He and his wife Susie owned the land in question for more than two decades, and he appeared recently on the radio talk show hosted by Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman on Denver's KHOW radio.
(Story continues below)
The result of the lawsuit was that Klein awarded to McLean ownership of 34 percent of a residential lot valued at an estimated $800,000-$1 million in a Boulder subdivision based on McLean's allegations he and family had, under the state's "adverse possession" law, used the property for their own uses in a "notorious" fashion and without permission of the owners for more than 18 years.
Amy Waddle, a spokeswoman with Colorado's 20th Judicial District, said, "The judges don't comment on pending cases. I believe they are considering appeal."
On the radio show Kirlin explained his shock when the land on which he's paid taxes of about $16,000 a year, plus $65 per month homeowner association dues, on which he's sprayed for weeds and repaired fences, suddenly was made unusable by Klein's decision.
"This is a foundation … of our country," Kirlin, an airline pilot, said. "You should be able to buy property and own it."
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Amen, I could care less about Tibet.
bump
was it actually a total turn over or was it just an easment to cross?
BTTT!
I wonder how many of us see a headline like this and automatically think, “I bet it’s my state”? I know I do.
don’t forget reporters are almost universally incompetent about reporting the law.
Just look at cnn’s toubin, he is always wrong in some aspect of his reporting and he alegedly has a law degree!
I would think he has a claim for 34% of those back taxes.<
But I'm not a lawyer.
If your friend received a summons, he'd probably be better off showing up (without a lawyer if he has to), than not show up! I'd be worried about letting the neighbor win by default.
I'm not a lawyer but I represented myself in an adverse possession case. It's not hard to research your own state's law on this topic, for free.
Here's just one example of what you can find from simply googling the search terms, "Arkansas," "adverse possession," and "years":
Arkansas: In Arkansas, the duration of such possession is seven (7) years for unimproved and unenclosed land held under color of title, and fifteen (15) years for wild and unimproved land held under color of title. Arkansas Code §16-56-105; 18-11-102-03; 18-60-212. --source
If the land is "wild" as you seem to describe it, your friend's neighbor would have to prove that he'd used your friend's land for 15 years without permission or objection from your friend (or previous owners of your friend's property).
However if the land is merely unimproved, the neighbor could claim it after only 7 years.
In either case, the neighbor would have to prove he'd used the land in a way that is "visible, notorious, distinct, exclusive, hostile, and with intent to hold against the true owner" (source, paragraph 2).
If your friend can prove that he objected to the neighbor's use of the land within the time limit, then he has a good case.
Part of the law about adverse possession in Arkansas has to do with the payment of property taxes. The neighbor hasn’t paid any of the taxes on the property so he can’t claim that as a reason.
Only time will tell. :0(
Sadly for your friend, the neighbor doesn't have to have paid any taxes whatsoever on the property if he's claiming it under adverse possession.
However, tell your friend not to give up so easily! As I mentioned before, you friend may have a good case.
IF your friend can show the court he complained to the neighbor (the sheriff could be compelled to be your friend's witness) --AND that he did it before the neighbor had used the land for the period named by Arkansas law (either 15 or 7 years, depending on the kind of property)-- then the neighbor doesn't have a claim.
No matter what happens, my friend is going to have to spend a lot of money and he doesn’t have it. The neighbor knows my friend is poor and can’t afford a legal fight. That is the way he will take over the land.
(I want this as a bumper sticker.)
Ain't that the truth!
Well, I'm not a lawyer. (So take this FWIW.) But I do know the concept of "adverse possession" pretty well, and I'm wondering if your friend's lawyer does? Has he handled similar cases before?
I know it seems perverse, but if the neighbor has NOT paid taxes on your friend's property, that fact would actually bolster the neighbor's legal claim of "adverse" and "hostile" taking of someone else's property.
You see, the neighbor has to KNOW that he's using someone else's property, to make it "adverse" under the law!
If the neighbor had paid taxes on it, then it would look like he was merely making a mistake -- and he wouldn't have an "adverse" claim.
Amyway, I know that sounds convoluted, but that's the way the legal doctrine works. Maybe your friend should get a second opinion from a different lawyer.
Some lawyers will let you have a free consultation. If your friend went to a couple of free consultations, he might at least find out whether he or the neighbor is in the right, under the law.
When I had to fight a similar case, I went to two lawyers. The first told me I had a good case, but there was no money in it, so he didn't want to represent me.
The second lawyer told me that for a small fee, he would help me figure out how to represent myself in court. Which I did. And I won.
My friend lives outside a small town. All the local shysters appear to help each other. One(the lawyer my friend talked to) even said lawyers are like prostitutes, they will screw anyone for money. I never expected a lawyer to say that. I almost fell out of my chair. I guess honesty and integrity from anyone is a little much to ask.
Ha! At least he's honest about his profession.
Well, I wish your friend well. The only other thing I can suggest is that if he is truly poor, maybe he qualifies for state-funded legal aid (not that legal aid lawyers are likely to know much about land law, but they might be able to find someone who does).
What I did was call a lawyer referral service that was listed in the "attorneys" section of the yellow pages. I described the problem and they referred me to a lawyer who was (a) familiar with local property laws and (b) willing to help me represent myself on the cheap, instead of paying him a retainer.
Good luck.
From what I understand from this discussion is your friend needs to establish a non disputable record that he objects to the neighbors use of the land. In order to firmly establish that he needs to file with the local authorities a criminal trespass complaint. Insist on it. The papers will be filled out and signed by him and the authorities.
Now, the locals might not do anything about it but at least your friend has proof of trespass, dated, and signed.
Undisputable.
Looking for this ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.