Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
1
Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws
and the Marketable Record Title Act
in the States East of the
Mississippi River
Adam L...
2
Analyzing Adverse
Possession Laws and
Cases of the States
East of the
Mississippi River
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015...
3
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
4
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
5
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
6
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
7
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
8
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
9
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
10
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
16
Historical Photograph
of 63 East 92nd Street
Front Areaway
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
N...
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
19
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
20
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adverse Possession Elements
21
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adverse Possession Elements
22
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adverse Possession Elements
23
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Requisite Time Period of Possession
24
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Requisite Time Period of Possession
Adverse Possession Defined:
New York (Old Law)
To establish adverse possession, the following
five elements must be proved...
Claim of Title
Under the old law, knowledge that rightful title belongs to another did not
defeat a claim of right.
Wallin...
The statute went further to limit the kinds of acts which
rise to a “manner that would give the owner a cause of
action fo...
Actual Possession Under the New Law
“De minimus encroachments”
The 2008 Amendments more strictly defined the type
of posse...
29
Actual and Exclusive
Possession
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorne...
30
Open and Notorious Use
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Open...
Kaufman v. Geisken Enters., Ltd.
• In Kaufman v. Geisken Enters., Ltd., the Court of
Appeals of Ohio found that using land...
Apperson v. White
• In Apperson v. White, the Court of Appeals of
Mississippi determined that building a fence and
plantin...
Continuous Use
• In Stellar v. David, defendants claimed adverse
possession over a marshland defendants had
seasonally hun...
Continuous Use
• In Apperson v. White, the Court of Appeals of
Mississippi found that building a fence, planting
crops, an...
Hostile
Objective
▫ Most states east of the Mississippi River
interpret hostile from an objective
standpoint, requiring ne...
Hostile
• The claimant must act as if he was
the true owner, no matter if he knew
that he was not or actually believed
tha...
Good Faith
• To claim adverse possession in Georgia, a
claimant must show “possession that is in the
right of the party as...
Bad Faith
• Historically, South Carolina required bad faith in all
instances. Claimants had to know they were
possessing p...
Permissive Use
• In Grace v. Koch, the true owner granted
claimant permission to mow the grass on
the disputed strip of la...
Disability Extends the
Time-Period
40
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Atto...
Hartman v. Goldman
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
The First Case Using the New Law in New York
42
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
43
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
44
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
45
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
46
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Walling v. Pryzbylo
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Seminal case that prompted the legislature to
amend the adverse posse...
In Walling v. Przybylo, the Wallings and the Przybylos
owned adjoining properties. The Wallings began using a
portion of t...
In 2004, the Przybylos discovered that they had title
to the portion of the land that the Wallings had been
using. The Wal...
50
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
51
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
52
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
53
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
54
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
55
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Marketable Record
Title Acts
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
56
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Marketable Record
Title Acts
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
...
57
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Marketable record title sta...
58
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Root of Title
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Marketable re...
59
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• To claim marketable record ...
60
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• The one significant way in ...
61
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• These time periods range fr...
62
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Assume X owns Blackacre in ...
63
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Owners of an interest in la...
64
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• To be effective, such notic...
65
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• The ability to file a notic...
66
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In Carrozza v. Voccola, the...
67
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In that case, a father file...
68
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In CHFA—Small Properties, I...
69
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• The Court of Appeals of Con...
70
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• The MRTAs of Florida, North...
71
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
While each state that has ena...
72
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• A subsequent purchaser take...
73
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• For instance, by referencin...
74
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In Florida Dep't of Transp....
75
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Another common exception fo...
76
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Most MRTAs do not affect or...
77
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• As demonstrated by the lang...
78
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• The issue of what constitut...
79
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In Garriot v. Peters, claim...
80
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Marketable record title is ...
81
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• One exception common to Flo...
82
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Florida and North Carolina’...
83
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
84
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
85
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Though the law allowed indi...
86
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Many disputes resulting fro...
87
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• One example of a state spec...
88
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• In practice, this exception...
89
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• Almost all of the MRTAs con...
90
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
• A number of states have
con...
91
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
•Ultimately, the majority of ...
92
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
93
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
94
© Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.
New York Real Estate Attorneys
The End
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws and the Marketable Record Title Act in the States East of the Mississippi River

845 views

Published on

Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws and the Marketable Record Title Act in the States East of the Mississippi River

Published in: Real Estate
  • If we are speaking about saving time and money this site HelpWriting.net is going to be the best option!! I personally used lots of times and remain highly satisfied.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • DOWNLOAD FULL. BOOKS INTO AVAILABLE FORMAT, ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .............. Browse by Genre Available eBooks ......................................................................................................................... Art, Biography, Business, Chick Lit, Children's, Christian, Classics, Comics, Contemporary, Cookbooks, Crime, Ebooks, Fantasy, Fiction, Graphic Novels, Historical Fiction, History, Horror, Humor And Comedy, Manga, Memoir, Music, Mystery, Non Fiction, Paranormal, Philosophy, Poetry, Psychology, Religion, Romance, Science, Science Fiction, Self Help, Suspense, Spirituality, Sports, Thriller, Travel, Young Adult,
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • DOWNLOAD FULL. BOOKS INTO AVAILABLE FORMAT, ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. PDF EBOOK here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. EPUB Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... 1.DOWNLOAD FULL. doc Ebook here { https://tinyurl.com/y8nn3gmc } ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... .............. Browse by Genre Available eBooks ......................................................................................................................... Art, Biography, Business, Chick Lit, Children's, Christian, Classics, Comics, Contemporary, Cookbooks, Crime, Ebooks, Fantasy, Fiction, Graphic Novels, Historical Fiction, History, Horror, Humor And Comedy, Manga, Memoir, Music, Mystery, Non Fiction, Paranormal, Philosophy, Poetry, Psychology, Religion, Romance, Science, Science Fiction, Self Help, Suspense, Spirituality, Sports, Thriller, Travel, Young Adult,
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws and the Marketable Record Title Act in the States East of the Mississippi River

  1. 1. 1 Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws and the Marketable Record Title Act in the States East of the Mississippi River Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys www.alblawfirm.com
  2. 2. 2 Analyzing Adverse Possession Laws and Cases of the States East of the Mississippi River © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  3. 3. 3 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  4. 4. 4 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  5. 5. 5 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  6. 6. 6 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  7. 7. 7 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  8. 8. 8 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  9. 9. 9 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  10. 10. 10 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  11. 11. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  12. 12. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  13. 13. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  14. 14. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  15. 15. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  16. 16. 16 Historical Photograph of 63 East 92nd Street Front Areaway © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  17. 17. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  18. 18. © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  19. 19. 19 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  20. 20. 20 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adverse Possession Elements
  21. 21. 21 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adverse Possession Elements
  22. 22. 22 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adverse Possession Elements
  23. 23. 23 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Requisite Time Period of Possession
  24. 24. 24 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Requisite Time Period of Possession
  25. 25. Adverse Possession Defined: New York (Old Law) To establish adverse possession, the following five elements must be proved: Possession must be: 1. Hostile and under a claim of right 2. Actual 3. Open and notorious 4. Exclusive 5. Continuous for the required period (10 years) ▫ Belotti v. Bickhardt, 228 N.Y. 296, 302 (N.Y. 1920) 25 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  26. 26. Claim of Title Under the old law, knowledge that rightful title belongs to another did not defeat a claim of right. Walling v. Przybylo, 7 N.Y.3d 228 (N.Y. 2006) Claim of Right NY CLS RPAPL § 501(3) Under the new law, a claim of right means a reasonable basis for the belief that the property belongs to the adverse possessor or property owner, as the case may be. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, claim of right shall not be required if the owner or owners of the real property throughout the statutory period cannot be ascertained in the records of the county clerk, or the register of the county, of the county where such real property is situated, and located by reasonable means. 26 Claim of Title (Old Law) vs. Claim of Right (New Law) © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  27. 27. The statute went further to limit the kinds of acts which rise to a “manner that would give the owner a cause of action for ejectment” by specifically excluding certain common actions as “de minimus” and “non adverse” 1. “…the existence of de minimus [de minimis] non- structural encroachments including, but not limited to, fences, hedges, shrubbery, plantings, sheds and non-structural walls, shall be deemed to be permissive and non-adverse.” 2. “…the acts of lawn mowing or similar maintenance across the boundary line of an adjoining landowner's property shall be deemed permissive and non-adverse.” ▫ NY CLS RPAPL § 543 27 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Actual Possession Under the New Law “De minimus encroachments” Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  28. 28. Actual Possession Under the New Law “De minimus encroachments” The 2008 Amendments more strictly defined the type of possession sufficient to uphold a claim of adverse possession. A person or entity is an "adverse possessor" of real property when the person or entity occupies real property of another person or entity with or without knowledge of the other's superior ownership rights, in a manner that would give the owner a cause of action for ejectment. • RPAPL 501(1) 28 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  29. 29. 29 Actual and Exclusive Possession © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • As the Pennsylvania Supreme Court put it: • [N]othing short of an actual possession, permanently continued, will take away from the owner the possession which the law attaches to the legal title; temporary acts on the land, without an intention to seat and occupy it for residence and cultivation or other permanent use consistent with the nature of the property, are not the actual possession required. • Parks v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 152 A. 682, 684 (Pa. 1934).
  30. 30. 30 Open and Notorious Use © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Open and notorious use means use that is so apparent that it puts the true owner on notice of the adverse claim. • See Appalachian Regional Healthcare, Inc.v. Royal Crown Bottling Co., Inc, 824 S.W.2d 878, 880 (Ky. 1992) (stating that it is ìlegal owners knowledge, either actual or imputable, of anothers possession of lands that affects ownershipî).
  31. 31. Kaufman v. Geisken Enters., Ltd. • In Kaufman v. Geisken Enters., Ltd., the Court of Appeals of Ohio found that using land “for recreation, planted and pruned trees, cultivated asparagus, parked cars, ran a go-cart, stored firewood, piled debris, placed burn barrels on the property, and kept the property generally attractive according to neighborhood standards” was enough to put a reasonable person on notice of possessor’s claim. 31 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  32. 32. Apperson v. White • In Apperson v. White, the Court of Appeals of Mississippi determined that building a fence and planting corn were clear and visible indicators of occupation that should have put a reasonably vigilant person on notice of said occupation. ▫ Kaufman v. Geisken Enters., Ltd., 2003-Ohio-1027, *8 (March 7, 2003). ▫ Apperson v. White, 950 So.2d 1113, 1118 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). 32 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  33. 33. Continuous Use • In Stellar v. David, defendants claimed adverse possession over a marshland defendants had seasonally hunted, trapped, sharecropped, and annually paid taxes on for forty years. The Delaware Superior Court found that using the land for hunting, trapping, and farming was consistent with use of a marshland and defendant’s use was therefore sufficiently continuous 33 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  34. 34. Continuous Use • In Apperson v. White, the Court of Appeals of Mississippi found that building a fence, planting crops, and continually harvesting timber on vacant land were consistent with acts of an owner of similar property and therefore satisfied the continuous use element. ▫ Stellar v. David, 257 A.2d 391, 394 (Del. Super. Ct. 1969). Id. at 395. Apperson v. White, 950 So.2d at 1117. 34 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  35. 35. Hostile Objective ▫ Most states east of the Mississippi River interpret hostile from an objective standpoint, requiring neither a good faith belief of ownership nor a bad faith desire to steal be demonstrated. 35 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  36. 36. Hostile • The claimant must act as if he was the true owner, no matter if he knew that he was not or actually believed that he was. Connelly v. Buckingham, 136 Mich App 462, 468 (1984). ▫ See MacDonough-Webster Lodge No.26 v. Wells, 175 Vt. 382, 394 (2003) (holding that a person can gain title over property by adverse possession without showing an intent to take another’s land provided that the claimant acts with the intent to exclude all others from possession). 36 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  37. 37. Good Faith • To claim adverse possession in Georgia, a claimant must show “possession that is in the right of the party asserting possession and not another.” That means that “[n]o prescription runs in favor of one who took possession of land knowing that it did not belong to him.” In other words, a party cannot claim adverse possession over property they know belongs to someone else. Kelley v. Randolph, 295 Ga. 721, 722 (2014). • Id. at 723 n.1 (citing Ellis v. Dasher, 101 Ga. 5, 9–10 (1897)). 37 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys Hostile
  38. 38. Bad Faith • Historically, South Carolina required bad faith in all instances. Claimants had to know they were possessing property owned by another in order to satisfy the hostility requirement. South Carolina has recently changed course though. It now only requires a showing of an objective intent to own that is adverse to the true owner’s interest. See Lusk v. Callham. 287 S.C. 459, 461 (Ct. App. 1986). See Perry v. Heirs at Law and Distributees of Gadsden, 316 S.C. 224 (1994). • See Jones v. Leagan, 384 S.C. 1, 13-14 (Ct. App. 2009) 38 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys Hostile
  39. 39. Permissive Use • In Grace v. Koch, the true owner granted claimant permission to mow the grass on the disputed strip of land. When the true owner later objected to claimant laying gravel down on the strip, claimant asserted adverse possession. The Supreme Court of Ohio rejected this claim, finding that the party had permission to use the strip and therefore use was not adverse. 39 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  40. 40. Disability Extends the Time-Period 40 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  41. 41. Hartman v. Goldman © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 The First Case Using the New Law in New York
  42. 42. 42 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  43. 43. 43 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  44. 44. 44 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  45. 45. 45 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  46. 46. 46 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  47. 47. Walling v. Pryzbylo © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Seminal case that prompted the legislature to amend the adverse possession statute and define a “claim of right.”
  48. 48. In Walling v. Przybylo, the Wallings and the Przybylos owned adjoining properties. The Wallings began using a portion of the Przybylos’ property as their own. • Bulldozed and deposited fill and topsoil on disputed property • Dug a trench and installed pipes for the purpose of carrying water to and under the disputed parcel, ultimately discharging the water in and over the disputed parcel. • Constructed an underground dog wire fence to enclose their dog and continuously mowed, graded, raked, planted, and watered the grassy area in dispute. • Installed 69 feet of four-inch pipe which ran underground but surfaced at the end of the pipeline. • Affixed a birdhouse on a post approximately 10 feet long stuck in a hole dug by the Wallings near the northwesterly corner of the grassy part of the disputed territory. • Since 1992, the post and birdhouse have remained in place. ▫ Walling v. Przybylo, 7 N.Y.3d 228, 230-231 (N.Y. 2006) ◦ See Adam Leitman Bailey & John M. Desiderio, Adverse Possession Changes Make Result Less Certain, 2009 The New York L. J., Feb. 11, 2009 at (2009). 48 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  49. 49. In 2004, the Przybylos discovered that they had title to the portion of the land that the Wallings had been using. The Wallings filed suit to quiet title. The Przybylos attempted to prove that Wallings knew they did not own the disputed parcel. Holding: The Court of Appeals held for the Wallings and declared that “actual knowledge that another person is the title owner does not, in and of itself, defeat a claim of right by an adverse possessor.” ▫ Walling v. Przybylo, 7 N.Y.3d 228 (N.Y. 2006) ◦ See Adam Leitman Bailey & John M. Desiderio, Adverse Possession Changes Make Result Less Certain, 2009 The New York L. J., Feb. 11, 2009 at (2009). 49 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  50. 50. 50 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  51. 51. 51 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  52. 52. 52 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  53. 53. 53 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  54. 54. 54 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  55. 55. 55 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Marketable Record Title Acts Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  56. 56. 56 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Marketable Record Title Acts Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Marketable record title statutes are statutes of limitations in that they require a demand to title to property to be asserted within a reasonable time after accrual of a title issue.
  57. 57. 57 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Marketable record title statutes simplify and facilitate land title transactions by allowing persons to rely on record title. When no other person files a notice of claim during the relevant statute of limitations or otherwise interrupts the chain of title a claim based on any title transaction prior to the start date is null and void and thus extinguished.
  58. 58. 58 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Root of Title Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Marketable record title refers to a recorded interest in land that extinguishes all claims and interest in the land that existed prior to the effective date of root of title. Root of title is the recorded title transaction that either creates the interest in the person claiming marketable record title or creates the interest in some other person through whom the claimant claims to have obtained a vested interest. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733b (West 1978); Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.01(2) (West 2000); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-2-6 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.103 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B2 (West 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.47(e) (West 1961); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-1(a) (2011); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 602 (West 1971); Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013).
  59. 59. 59 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • To claim marketable record title to land, the claimant must have an unbroken chain of title to the land dating back to the effective date of root of title and such date must be some specified amount of time prior to the date at which marketability is being determined. A person possesses an unbroken chain of title if records show that no title transaction purporting to divest claimant of his interest or create a competing interest in the land has occurred since the effective date of root of title. If such can be shown, the claimant is deemed to hold title to the land free and clear of all interests except those exceptions expressly enumerated by statute. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733c (West 1979); Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.02 (West 1997); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.101 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B2 (West 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.48 (West 1961); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-2 (1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 601 (West 1969); Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013). • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733c (West 1979); Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.02 (West 1997); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.102 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B2 (West 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.48 (West 1961); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-2 (1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 602 (West 1971); Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013).
  60. 60. 60 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • The one significant way in which these ten states differ in how they define marketable record title is in in how long prior to the date at which marketability is being determined each state’s respective Marketable Record Title Act mandates the effective date of root of title must be. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733c (West 1979); Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.02 (West 1997); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.101 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B2 (West 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.48 (West 1961); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-2 (1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 602 (West 1971); Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013). • See Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.102 (West 1997).
  61. 61. 61 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • These time periods range from thirty years (Florida, North Carolina, and Wisconsin), to forty years (Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Vermont), to fifty years (Indiana). Michigan’s MRTA, additionally, creates a separate category for mineral interests in land for which an unbroken chain of title for twenty years is required to establish marketable record title. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733c (West 1979); Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.02 (West 1997); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.101 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B2 (West 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.48 (West 1961); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-2 (1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 602 (West 1971); Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013). • See Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.102 (West 1997).
  62. 62. 62 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Assume X owns Blackacre in fee simple absolute and marketability is being determined in 2015. The record shows the following transactions, each in fee simple: A to B (1960), B to C (1990), and C to X (2000). Therefore, X’s root of title is the conveyance from A to B in 1960, that being the earliest conveyance of record occurring at least 30 years prior to the time marketability is being determined. In other words, X is claiming a vested interest in Blackacre through his predecessors in title. The conveyances from A to B to C to X represent an unbroken chain of title because the conveyance from A to B conveys the same interest that is being claimed by X—fee simple—with no competing interests in the interim.
  63. 63. 63 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Owners of an interest in land not preserved by one of the many enumerated exceptions and limitations are not completely out of options. MRTAs in the states east of the Mississippi allow a party with an interest in real property to preserve that interest by recording a notice of claim, also called a notice of intent, following the effective date of root of title. See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33f (West 1979); Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.05 (West 2014); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13- 118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.103 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-4 (West 1973); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.51 (West 1988); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-5 (West 1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 603 (West 1993); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33 (West 2013). • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33g (West 1979); Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.06 (West 2010); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-2 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.105 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-4 (West 1973); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.52 (West 1988); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-6 (West 1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 605 (West 1993); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33 (West 2013). Notice of Claim
  64. 64. 64 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • To be effective, such notice must set forth in particular terms the nature of the claim, listing the contact information of the interested parties and providing a full and accurate description of the land and interest at issue, and be recorded in the county in which the land is located. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33f (West 1979); Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.05 (West 2014); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-1 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.103 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-4 (West 1973); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.51 (West 1988); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34- 13.1-5 (West 1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 603 (West 1993); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33 (West 2013). • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33g (West 1979); Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.06 (West 2010); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-2 (West 2002); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.105 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-4 (West 1973); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.52 (West 1988); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34- 13.1-6 (West 1995); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 605 (West 1993); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33 (West 2013). Notice of Claim
  65. 65. 65 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • The ability to file a notice of claim to preserve an interest from being extinguished by an MRTA is not typically an unfettered right. The MRTAs of Connecticut, Indiana, Michigan, and Rhode Island include a prohibition on filing a notice of claim for purposes of slandering title and allow for the recovery of damages and/or attorneys’ fees if a property owner successfully establishes such slander. Slander of title is generally defined as “[a] false statement…that casts doubt on another person's ownership of property and thereby causing damage or loss.” • See Conn. Gen. Stat ß 47-33j (West 1979); Ind. Code ß 32-20-5-1 (West 2015); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.108 (West 1970); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-9 (West 1995). • SLANDER OF TITLE, Black's Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014). Slander of Title and Fictitious Claims
  66. 66. 66 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In Carrozza v. Voccola, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island held that to assert a claim for slander of title, the claimant must prove that the alleged wrongdoer maliciously made a false statement about claimant’s interest in real property and that claimant suffered financial harm as a result. • Carrozza v. Voccola, 90 A.3d 142, 15152 (R.I. 2014). • Id. at 14649. • Id. at 154.
  67. 67. 67 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In that case, a father filed notices of lis pendens against property in his deceased son’s name and the executor of son’s estate was subsequently prevented from selling the property due to an inability to provide clear and marketable title. The court, based on the father’s own admission that he did not file the lis pendens to protect a legitimate property interest but rather to collect on a debt he thought owned to him, found that the requisite malice existed and accepted the executor’s slander of title claim. • Carrozza v. Voccola, 90 A.3d 142, 15152 (R.I. 2014). • Id. at 14649. • Id. at 154.
  68. 68. 68 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In CHFA—Small Properties, Inc. v. Elazazy, plaintiffs, holder of two leasehold mortgages that mortgagor had defaulted on, commenced a foreclosure action, received a judgment of foreclosure, and brought summary proceedings against defendant lessees. Plaintiff subsequently sought to sell its interest in the property, but the sale fell through due to an inability to convey marketable title after defendants filed a notice of claim to an interest in the property in the country records. • The Court of Appeals of Connecticut denied plaintiff’s slander of title claim, finding that although defendants did not actually have a legal interest in the property, defendants honestly believed that they did and therefore the false claim was not made with malicious intent. • CHFASmall Properties, Inc. v. Elazazy, 157 Conn. App. 1, 13(2015). • Id. at 3. • Id. at 4,10.
  69. 69. 69 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • The Court of Appeals of Connecticut denied plaintiff’s slander of title claim, finding that although defendants did not actually have a legal interest in the property, defendants honestly believed that they did and therefore the false claim was not made with malicious intent. • CHFASmall Properties, Inc. v. Elazazy, 157 Conn. App. 1, 13(2015). • Id. at 3. • Id. at 4,10.
  70. 70. 70 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • The MRTAs of Florida, North Carolina, and Ohio do not contain a provision that expressly prohibits claims made with the purpose of slandering title; however, they do contain a general ban against any and all false or fictitious claims. In such cases, the same consequences befall a wrongdoer as they do in the specific case of slander of title: the claimant will be able to recover damages and/or attorneys’ fees from the wrongdoer if the claimant successfully establishes that a false claim has been filed that caused the claimant harm. • Fla. Stat. ß 712.08 (West 1997); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-6 (West 1973); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.52(D) (West 1988).
  71. 71. 71 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys While each state that has enacted a Marketable Record Title Act has its own “exceptions”, interests that are not extinguished by the Act and a purchaser must take subject to, there are a number of general exceptions that are common amongst the varying state statutes. Exceptions
  72. 72. 72 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • A subsequent purchaser takes subject to all interests stated with sufficient specificity subsequent to the root of title. • Most statutes also contain a provision requiring that preexisting interests referred to in the chain of title be referred to with specificity, rather than general language such as “subject to existing encumbrances.” These states require that the interest be expressly referred to by its particular location in another document. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 4733d; Fla.Stat. Ann. ß 712.03; Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-2; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.101; N.C. Gen. Stat ß 47B3; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.49; R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-3; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.27 ß 601; Wis. Stat. Ann. ß 893.33 (2) (West 2013). Muniments
  73. 73. 73 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • For instance, by referencing a previous deed and the date on which and location where it was recorded. An indefinite reference does not place the referred-to document within the chain of title and therefore would not preserve the interest to which reference is made. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. ß 47-33d(1); Fla. Stat. ß 712.03(1); Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-2(a); Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.105; N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-3(1); Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.49(A); R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-3(1); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33(2).
  74. 74. 74 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In Florida Dep't of Transp. v. Clipper Bay Investments, LLC, plaintiff sought to quiet title under the MRTA of Florida to a parcel of land.Defendant countered that the parcel at issue was part of its easement as specifically disclosed in a document within the chain of title and was thus exempt from being extinguished under the MRTA. The Supreme Court of Florida agreed with defendant, finding that defendant’s interests had been referenced with sufficient specificity to preserve its interests. • The court held that a lease, recorded subsequent to the effective date of root of title, that made specific reference to the date the easement was recorded and the book and page numbers in the records of a particular county was enough to provide notice to plaintiff. • Florida Dep't of Transp. v. Clipper Bay Investments, LLC, 160 So. 3d 858 (Fla. 2015). • Id.
  75. 75. 75 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Another common exception found throughout the states is that the MRTA does not affect any right or interest of the United States or the state that enacted the statute. State’s preserve any right to land it may have that allows it to facilitate a public utility, such as a highway. Some states extend this immunity to public service companies and natural gas companies. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. ß 47-33d(5); Fla. Stat. ß 712.03(5); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-111; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. ß 565.104; N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(9); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß5301.53(G); R.I. Gen. Laws Ann. ß34-13.1-7; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 605(b; Wis. Stat. ß 893.33(5). • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33d (West 1995); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/13-120; R.I. Gen. laws Ann. ß 34-13.1-3 (West 1998). Government Interests in Property
  76. 76. 76 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Most MRTAs do not affect or extinguish the rights of any person in actual possession of land. For example, under Indiana’s MRTA, marketable record title is subject to all interests preserved by “possession by the same owner continuously for at least fifty (50) years.” This exception is intended to prevent a purchaser from taking property free from an actual possessor who has been in clear and continuous use. A purchaser cannot rely on the Marketable Recording Title Act to avoid taking property subject to an interest that they reasonably should be aware. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33d(2) (West 1995); Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.03(3) (West 2010); Ind. Code Ann. ß 32-20-3-2(2)(B) (West 2011); N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(3) (West 1995); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.49(B) (West 1963); R.I. Gen. laws Ann. ß 34-13.1-3(2) (West 1998). • Ind. Code Ann. ß 32-20-3-2(2)(B) (West 2011). Possession
  77. 77. 77 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • As demonstrated by the language of the Indiana Marketable Record Title Act states often specify a mandatory length of time of possession for the exception to apply. In marketable record title does not affect or extinguish the right of “any person in possession of lands, so long as such person is in such possession.” North Carolina’s Marketable Record Title Act contains similar language to that of Florida. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33d(2) (West 1995); Ind. Code Ann. ß 32-20-3-2(2)(B) (West 2011); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.49(B) (West 1963); R.I. Gen. laws Ann. ß 34-13.1-3(2) (West 1998). • Fla. Stat. Ann. ß 712.03(3) (West 2010). • See N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(3) (West 1995) Possession
  78. 78. 78 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • The issue of what constitutes “possession” has been raised in court. In Department of Transp. v. Mid-Peninsula Realty Inv. Group, LLC, the Florida Court of Appeals determined that where the statute did not define “possession”, the term must be given its plain and ordinary meaning. Furthermore, the court defined “possession” as “visible power or control over something, as distinct from lawful ownership; holding or occupancy; control or occupancy.” • Dep't of Transp. v. Mid-Peninsula Realty Inv. Grp., LLC, 171 So.3d 771, 77576 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. July 29, 2015). • Id. at 776.
  79. 79. 79 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In Garriot v. Peters, claimant asserted possession over an undeveloped wooded tract it had rented out to farmers, sold timber off, hunted on, picked berries on, drove vehicles on, and built a fence on. The Court of Appeals of Indiana found that claimant’s use, particularly the building of the fence, the leasing to farmers, and execution of timber contracts, demonstrated sufficient evidence of control to amount to dominion over the land. • Garriot v. Peters, 878 N.E.2d 431, 440 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). • Id. at 441.
  80. 80. 80 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Marketable record title is often subject to an interest in land arising by adverse possession. If a person can demonstrate a period of adverse possession, as defined by each state’s respective adverse possession statute, which occurs either in whole or in part following the effective root of title date, a subsequent purchaser must take subject to the adverse possession interest. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47-33d(3) (West 1995); 735 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/13-118 (West 1983); Ind. Code Ann. ß 32- 20-3-2(3)(West 2011); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. ß 5301.49(C) (West 1963); R.I. Gen. laws Ann. ß 34-13.1-3(3) (West 1998); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 604(a)(1) (West 2011); Adverse Possession
  81. 81. 81 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • One exception common to Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, Vermont, and Wisconsin and absent in the Marketable Record Title Act of the other six states is that is that marketable title also remains subject to restrictive covenants that encumber the property. Of the MRTAs of these four states, only Wisconsin creates an exception for all forms of covenants restricting the use of real estate. The other three MRTA limited the exception to specific forms of covenants. • See Fla. Stat. ßß 712.03; Ind. Code ß 32-20-3-2(6); N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-3(13); Vt. stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 610; Wis. Stat. ß 893.33(6). • See Wis. Stat. ß 893.33(6). Restrictive Covenants
  82. 82. 82 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Florida and North Carolina’s statutes specify that the exception only applies to residential covenants or to covenants made by residential organizations. This was a particular issue in Florida, where the passage of that state’s Marketable Record Title Act left many homeowners’ associations worried that covenants for certain housing developments— governing aspects like uniformity in appearance—would no longer remain binding after the expiration of the statutory time period. • See Fla. Stat. ß 712.05; N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-3.
  83. 83. 83 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  84. 84. 84 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  85. 85. 85 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Though the law allowed individuals to file notices of claim to preserve interests homeowners associations did not have that same ability. The law was later amended to close that loophole, although interests which expired before the amendment of the act were not retroactively revived due to concerns of an unconstitutional taking. However, legislation was passed to encourage the “revitalization” of those lapsed covenants. • Fla. Stat. ß 712.05 • Fla. Stat. ßß 720.403720.407.
  86. 86. 86 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Many disputes resulting from MRTAs relate to easements. Easements are rights over another property owner’s land either expressly granted or created by law through factors such as use, implication, and necessity. Easements
  87. 87. 87 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • One example of a state specific exception is that of county tax records. This exception is unique to Florida and North Carolina. Under this exception, a purchaser takes subject to the interests of any person who is listed as the owner of the property on the tax records of the county where the property is located at the time marketability is being established. • Id. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(4). • Id. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(4). Tax Records
  88. 88. 88 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • In practice, this exception requires a title searcher to search the tax records of the county the land resides in to determine whether anyone has an interest in the land in addition to the title record. The required search period is limited in the same or similar way as the title search is, however, and thus is not overly burdensome. • Id. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(4). • Id. See also N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. ß 47B-3(4). Tax Records
  89. 89. 89 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • Almost all of the MRTAs contain language stating that “disability or lack of knowledge of any kind on the part of anyone” does not suspend the running of the statutorily prescribed period. Anyone unable to assert his own claim may have someone do so on his behalf. This allows subsequent purchasers to rely on the prescribed time limit, rather than having to investigate the mental or physical state of those who may have a claim to the property. • See Conn. Gen. Stat. ß 47-33f; Fla. Stat. ß 712.05; Ind. Code ß 32-20-4-1; Mich. Comp. Laws ß 565.103; N.C. Gen. Stat. ß 47B-4; Ohio Rev. Code ß 5301.51; R.I. Gen. Laws ß 34-13.1-5; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 27 ß 602(b); Wis. Stat. ß 893.33(5). Disability and Tolling of Statutory Time Period
  90. 90. 90 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys • A number of states have contemplated the issue of whether a “wild deed” can be the root of title under the MRTA. A deed is “wild” when it is forged or invalid because the grantor of the interest does not actually own the purported interest. Wild Deeds
  91. 91. 91 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys •Ultimately, the majority of states that have considered the question have decided that a wild deed can in fact constitute root of title, despite it being invalid. Wild Deeds
  92. 92. 92 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys
  93. 93. 93 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015
  94. 94. 94 © Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. 2015 Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. New York Real Estate Attorneys The End

×