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 ...
My gosh! I just realized, these people have been paying $16.000 a year in taxes on a VACANT LOT! What government greed Colorodo has!
Boulder, CO—run by libs and lefties.
That works so long as the claimant isn’t friends with the judge.
I live in California, and we have Prop 13. I pay $1,400 per year in taxes on our 42 acre ranch, and we also have a home in Orange County that we pay about $1,500 per year on.
If I had to pay $16,000 per year in taxes, we would have to work until we die just to pay it. Retirement would be out of the question.
bkmarking this. thanks.
You’re welcome.
Maybe Kirlin can get some a Pro Bono attorney to represent his appeal to a higher court and base the case on improper use of judicial powers by Klein and unjust enrichment,possible perjury, and abuse of the legal syetem by a retired judge by McLean, the retired Judge. If he wins he can then sue both of them for civil damages. He may be able to retain an attorney on the basis of a presumed lawsuit against the Judge and the retired judge.
I believe that Adverse Possession means the landowner must know there is a possibility of a land dispute, then the 7 year clock would start ticking once he becomes aware of that. If he had his land posted to keep out trespassers that would help his case..Also a fence would have helped. On the face of it he was truly abused by the legal system and a higher court should not allow that to stand
The kirlins are calmer than I would be. My actions after soemthing like this being done to me would definatly land me in prison for murder.
More audio from 630 KHOW’s Caplis and Silverman show about the Kirlin property case, aired November 12, 2007
Well you aren’t the first person to say that—at least 2 people on the other thread indicated much the same.
Thanks for your insight. I’m routing for you to be correct.
“So, if I trespass on my neighbors property for 18 years, I can claim it as my own? Utter nonsense.”
That’s what the Albanians did in Serbian Kosovo. Populated it and then are claiming it as their own. It’s what the Muzzies are doing in Europe, populating it and one day it will be Eurabia by default. It’s what is happening in CA and other southwestern states by the Mexican invasion of our borders. Trespass on it and then claim it as your own by having trespassed. So, what else is new under the sun?
Yes, but still it is Colorado law.
No it is NOT. If you are granted a right of way or an easement across someones property you in effect now have control of the property. The owner can no longer do anything that would infringe on your right of way or easement.
It is a cloud on the title and does prevent the owner for using the property as he see’s fit. Combine that with local zoning rules regarding building offsets you can make the owner unable to build almost anywhere on the property.
Additionally, depending on how the right of way or easement is written, the owner would have to care for the property to local codes and/or association rules AND in worse case, maintain the right of way or even improve the right of way to zoning or code rules (as not doing so would be infringing on the access across the property).
The owner still has the title but the right of way holder has the defacto control of the property. The owner pays taxes, the ROW holder gets the use as granted.
The ROW holder also has a right that extends beyond the owners title holder rights and is inflicted on the next owner and all subsequent owners unless otherwise stated in the ROW.
So how is this less control than being the titled owner?
Adverse posession is the name of the game for the Kansas City City Council.....
If I were the real owners; I would bechecking to see what deals the judges and lawyer may had with each other and perhaps a land developer.
There’s always a trail and there has to be a reason why they did it(not necessairly anything more than to see if they can get away with it) I would be checking on this and I would not let up at all. Judges and lawyers of all people should know what’s right. These guy including the lawyer should be held accoutable.
I would check to see if that is real easement being used. It should be in the plans if it is.
I'd advised him to call an attorney as it's easier to "nip it in the bud". The attorney drew up an agreement where the neighbor agreed he would never initiate adverse possession" AND IT WAS RECORDED. Had my brother not known where his property lines were, he might have missed the trespass to start with.
"Open and Notorious" is not quite what everyone thinks. And trespassing can involve "tacking", i.e., passing the TIME element from owner to owner. When in doubt, call an attorney. It can prevent expensive litigation in the future.
That’s interesting that WND plucked my quote out of the ether. I lost all respect for WND a little while back though, when I found out that they sell bogus book reviews for $31K, as part of a monthlong ad package. WND is just about the money, make no mistake. Their conservative roots go only as far as the money goes.
Make that “Judge Dufus”... or do I repeat myself?
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.