Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Adverse possession in common law, and the related civil law concept of usucaption (also acquisitive prescription or prescriptive acquisition), are legal mechanisms under which a person who does not have legal title to a piece of property, usually real property, may acquire legal ownership based on continuous possession or occupation without the permission of its legal owner.
In Texas, where it takes 10 years of squatting to obtain property through "adverse possession," a man named Kenneth Robinson recently tried to claim a $330,000 home in the city of Flower Mound for ...
Property is generally deemed to have been lost if it is found in a place where the true owner likely did not intend to set it down and where it is not likely to be found by the true owner. At common law, the finder of a lost item could claim the right to possess the item against any person except the true owner or any previous possessors. [3] [2]
A good title consists of the combination of these three (possession, right of possession, and right of property) in the same person(s). The extinguishing of ancient, forgotten, or unasserted claims, such as E's in the example above, was the original purpose of statutes of limitations. Otherwise, title to property would always be uncertain.
In property law, the American rule of possession states that a landlord is obligated only to deliver legal possession, but not actual possession, of a leased premises to a tenant. Thus, if a tenant arrives at a leased premises only to discover that it is still inhabited by a previous tenant who is holding over, or by squatters, it is the tenant ...
Each U.S. state has a recording act, a statute which dictates the legal procedure by which an individual claiming an interest in real property (real estate) formally establishes their claim to that property. The recordation of property rights becomes particularly significant where an unscrupulous dealer in land purports to sell the same tract ...
The rule against perpetuities serves a number of purposes. First, English courts have long recognized that allowing owners to attach long-lasting contingencies to their property harms the ability of future generations to freely buy and sell the property, since few people would be willing to buy property that had unresolved issues regarding its ownership hanging over it.
There is a rebuttable presumption that the possessor of property also has the right of possession, and evidence to the contrary may be offered to establish who has the legal right of possession to determine who should have actual possession, which may include evidence of ownership (without assignment of the right of possession) or evidence of a ...