Posted on 11/21/2007 8:13:56 PM PST by george76
A Warning for Property Owners (Boulder, CO)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1924861/posts
Retired judge: This land is my land (Jurist rules in favor of colleague, snatches $1 million parcel)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1925997/posts
Land Lost After Boulder Couple Failed To Use It
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1926521/posts
Panel won’t probe Boulder land ruling
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1929194/posts
Former Boulder District Judge, Boulder Mayor, RTD board member - among other elected positions - Richard McLean and his wife, attorney Edith Stevens, used an arcane common law called “adverse possession” to claim the land for their own.
All McLean needed was to develop an “attachment” to it.
Undoubtedly, his city connections couldn’t have hurt, either.
In the court papers, McLean and his family admit to regularly trespassing on the Kirlins’ property.
They created paths. They said they put on a political fundraiser and parties on it (though not a single photograph of these events surfaced in court documents).
How did the Kirlins learn this travesty was afoot? Susie Kirlin was warned about it at a Boulder High School football game. Be cautious, her neighbor warned, someone has designs on your property.
“I laughed when I first heard it. I really didn’t know that anyone had an emotional attachment to our land,” Kirlin tells me. “I was quite surprised. I was even more surprised that someone could claim our land. But my neighbor told me this was a well- connected person and I should take it seriously.”
When the couple began building a fence on the land - which is within Boulder city limits, not out in the wilderness - McLean was able, according to the Kirlins, to obtain a restraining order in an exceptionally speedy 2 1/2 hours.
Boulder District Judge Morris Sandstead, who served with McLean, issued the restraining order quite swiftly.
Serendipity, I guess.
http://www.denverpost.com/harsanyi/ci_7501264
Hard feelings on Hardscrabble Drive
Land ruling protest draws hundreds
Several protesters yelled “shame”and “thief” at McLean and Stevens as they drove away from their home shortly before the rally began at noon.
One woman stepped up to the car’s passenger side window and yelled, “How can you live with yourself?”
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/nov/19/protest-draws-hundreds-hard-feelings-on-drive/
on the radio talk show hosted by Dan Caplis and Craig Silverman on Denver’s KHOW radio.
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.
During the trial McLean testified he had worn a path 20 feet onto Kirlin’s land to obtain access to his backyard, but Kirlin, a former member of the homeowners’ association board and the HOA manager testified that was incorrect.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58670
~ joanie
Richard McLean says that he held political parties on his neighbor’s land. Interesting if any pictures show up to validate this claim.
None apparently so far in the court documents.
A year ago, we decided to construct a fence, in accordance with our HOA guidelines, as we had been warned by another neighbor that former judge Richard McLean and Edie Stevens, another lawyer, were planning to file this "adverse possession" claim (a land-grabbing technique). It was shortly after that time that paths started to appear on our property. McLean and Stevens were unable to provide any photographs of any paths existing prior to one year ago, even though they claimed these paths were obvious for more than 18 years.
Prior to trial, we tried to accommodate their requests for access to the rear of their house from the western side (though they already had access). We offered to build steps, and were even willing to offer them a small portion of our land to facilitate their needs. They declined all of this. Their objective appeared to be to take away a large portion (34 percent) of our lot, so as to render it un-build able, unusable and worthless on the open market, which is what they accomplished with Judge Klein's assistance.
Since 1984, we have paid taxes, homeowners' dues, complied with our HOA requests for fence maintenance, and city of Boulder requests for weed control. We walked by at least once a week and never saw any indication that the neighbors were using it, much less making a hostile claim to our property. How would you feel, if under these circumstances, someone took your property?
Is it right, moral or ethical that a Boulder judge award a former Boulder judge our property, when in fact they had no photographs or proof of the alleged paths for the past 18 years? In Judge Klein's order, he states "Plaintiffs' attachment to the land is stronger than the true owners' attachment." Oh really? We don't think so!
DON and SUSIE KIRLIN
This is what I am hearing too :
” McLean and Stevens were unable to provide any photographs of any paths existing prior to one year ago, even though they claimed these paths were obvious for more than 18 years.”
I think it is the easement too. I think also ANY TIME during those 18 years they could have blockaded the property or at least sent a letter advising them they were not to tresspass.
ANYTHING TO SAY the tresspass was known and not welcome.
People forget the key to adverse possession is INACTION by the owner.
I think you need to translate for those in rio linda:
“You snooze, you lose.”
(we still don’t know if it is an easment or the actual land given)
” McLean and Stevens were unable to provide any photographs of any paths existing prior to one year ago, even though they claimed these paths were obvious for more than 18 years.”
Tresspassers should be shot.
“World’s Worst Neighbors.” ...
The empty lot is about 200 yards from the Kirlins’ current home. The couple said they visited it every week when they and their three dogs walked to nearby trails.
The Kirlins said they have paid taxes on the 55-foot-by-80-foot lot for 23 years, sprayed for noxious weeds on it and paid homeowners dues...
When asked what they would do with the land if the judge’s decision is upheld, Susie Kirlin said, “We’re not going there yet.”
“I really do believe in the justice system,” her husband said. “This is so unjust and unfair and unethical.”
http://www.dailybulletin.com/ci_7556143?source=most_viewed
“It’s stealing with a law license instead of a gun,” said Will Campbell, a Boulder resident and supporter of Susie and Don Kirlin.
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_7557747?source=rss
Defeating adverse possession
Legal sources say there are ways to protect property:
Diligence: If a landowner finds a pattern of trespassing or an encroachment by a neighbor, he should demand that it stop, then sue, if necessary.
Permission: A landowner who suspects someone of using his property can give that person written permission to do so, removing the opportunity to claim possession is adverse or “hostile.”
Insufficient use: A landowner can stipulate that the person used the property but not enough that a reasonably diligent owner would have noticed and had the opportunity to object. The adverse possession must demonstrate sufficient acts to demonstrate a “claim” of ownership.
Insufficient time: A landowner can show a period in which the other person did not use the property. Adverse possession requires “continuous” use of the property for the legally required period, which is 18 years in Colorado.
Nonexclusive use: The owner or others can prove they have used the land just as much as the person claiming adverse possession.
It sounds like you got sandbagged. Lawsuit is the only way to go. You will probably have to take it to the state level and yes, it will be expensive but it’s your land - fight for it!
These people are criminals, plain and simple.
If, in fact, the owners walked by their land nearly every day and saw that it was being used by others, then they should have promptly taken steps to either prevent the use (i.e., put up a fence or prosecute for trespass) or given them permission to use the property so that their use is no longer “adverse” and “notorious.” Instead, they apparently did nothing for eighteen years, and therefore, they have no one to blame but themselves.
One of the HOA board members and a 20-plus year resident just a few doors down from the property, along with our HOA management company, testified that there were no signs that anyone was using our property!
Boulder District Judge Morris Sandstead, who served with McLean, issued the restraining order quite swiftly.
Serendipity, I guess.
Claire Levy - still not getting it
When asked what her reaction was to Stevens’ resignation, Levy said, “It’s best that we all just move on and attend to the business we have.”
This may actually be the most damaging outcome for Claire because it lets her think this is behind her while she still has not spoken to the issue. And her ending request to move on once again comes across as arrogant and unwilling to speak to the issue at hand.
Again, we will have to see how the next few weeks play out.
Will Claire finally make a statement about her opinion of the land grab?
Will this story stay front and center for awhile? Will a credible opponent run against Claire in the election?
But as of now I think her seat remains very much in play in the upcoming election. And if the Republicans nominate a strong candidate (hint - Bob Greenlee), then it’s a real race.
http://www.davidthielen.info/politics/2007/11/claire-levy-—s.html
CharlesLuce :
The point is not that what McLean did was unlawful, but rather that it was unethical. Having the legal power to effect a result is not a legal imperative to do so.
Assuming that McLean can state a successful claim for adverse possession, you just don’t do that to you neighbor, even an absentee neighbor.
One would think that a respected judge, who has witnessed the sad pagentry of litigation play out in his courtroom for years, would understand this, and would understand why people are upset.
It’s not about legal rights. It’s about doing what is right.
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/nov/25/paths-never-crossed-families-in-land-battle-both/
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.