Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: You are here
RE(((What about making adding to that, a claim for adverse possession ?

How can they claim adverse possession when the previous owner LET them use it? Unless I'm mistaken the essence of adverse possession is that it's done for several years WITHOUT permission.)))

adverse possession is difficult to win in any circumstance...BUT...this new owner might just P.O. a judge. I knew of a case where a homeowner, angry at his neighbors, painted "a&&holes" on his roof! Judge fined him and made him remove it.

LETTING someone do something can take many forms. It can involve benign neglect, straightforward legal permission, lack of knowledge...Mostly, as I understand it, the circumstances for a successful action need to involve years where the owning party does nothing to protest the possession.

Building the fence and painting it an annoying color may be a matter for shrugs from a strict libertarian, but I think it is in the category of the man who painted insults on his roof. Building the fence for no other reason than to obstruct the view of people used to a particular view is not going to win the affections of a judge--it is clearly a vindictive act. Legal, perhaps, but could be actionable.

I'd like to hear how this case goes...

1,054 posted on 05/14/2002 3:59:19 PM PDT by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies ]


To: Mamzelle
I remember reading that in Japan, someone's right to build is balanced against the rights of the neighbors to see the sunrise unhindered. One can also mention domain registrations, whereby squatters used to register domain names in order to extort corporations.
1,066 posted on 05/14/2002 4:13:05 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1054 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson