Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

Be the change you want see in the world


Wait who owns the cart? Me?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007






Grip it and rip it posted:

Wait who owns the cart? Me?

you think you do, but eminent domain says it actually still belongs to the grocery store, you just have a transferrable/sellable limited set of cart-pushing rights, which get tricky when your cart and someone else's cart start to interfere with each other, plus the grocery store was stolen from native americans and the cart is made from the blood of exploited minorities
also if the cops see you sitting down on the sidewalk near a cart that means it's OK to shoot you

DaveSauce
Feb 15, 2004

Oh, how awkward.


Leperflesh posted:

you think you do, but eminent domain says it actually still belongs to the grocery store, you just have a transferrable/sellable limited set of cart-pushing rights, which get tricky when your cart and someone else's cart start to interfere with each other, plus the grocery store was stolen from native americans and the cart is made from the blood of exploited minorities
also if the cops see you sitting down on the sidewalk near a cart that means it's OK to shoot you

Yeah but what if I push the cart around for 20 years and nobody else touches it is it my cart?

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






You’d have to improve the cart too

And shout “this is my cart !” At least once a year

VanSandman
Feb 16, 2011
SWAP.AVI EXCHANGER

euphronius posted:

You’d have to improve the cart too

And shout “this is my cart !” At least once a year

Adverse possession is my favorite weird legal thing.

pentyne
Nov 7, 2012

I just couldn't look at your old avatar anymore
Fucking nauseating!


What about the powered scooter carts? Do transportation law now apply?

Nonexistence
Jan 6, 2014


Ok but if there's bread on both sides of some meat inside the cart

mercenarynuker
Sep 10, 2008

i am the bruce of the willis


Ah, but in Britain they call them 'trolleys'

Nice piece of fish
Jan 29, 2008



Ultra Carp

And would you say that's a problem?

mercenarynuker
Sep 10, 2008

i am the bruce of the willis


I guess that depends on how many people you run over

SkunkDuster
Jul 15, 2005






mercenarynuker posted:

I guess that depends on how many people you run over

You need to make a distinction between carts, trolleys, and Ford Mustangs.

blarzgh
Apr 14, 2009

SNITCHIN' RANDY


Grimey Drawer

VanSandman posted:

Adverse possession is my favorite weird legal thing.

Adverse possession is actually pretty intuitive, in context. Say farmer brown builds his fence about a foot onto his neighbor's property. He has trespassed, but after two years the statute of limitations runs and he can no longer sue for damages. However the neighbor still owns that foot under the deed records. After 35 years go by, the neighbor has literally never mentioned it and Farmer Brown's grandson goes to sell Brown's land.

At some point, the chain of title on properties need their own Statute of Limitations, where after a certain period of time, people can be assured that whoever has acted as if they own property is the legal owner, and any lawsuit to recover possession of that property will be time barred.

So "adverse possession" is just a statute of limitations against people saying, "No, actually, I own that land over there."

Organza Quiz posted:

Now explain fiduciary duty!

You go to the grocery store for me, you're obligated to shop on my behalf. You are supposed to get the groceries I need, in your best judgment, and not supposed to get groceries for yourself if they were the groceries I needed. You're also supposed to tell me what groceries you got. If you violate these responsibilities, I can sue you.

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






I dont think your example satisfies common law adverse possession.

The hostile possession element gets wonky

euphronius fucked around with this message at 15:40 on May 5, 2021

toplitzin
Jun 13, 2003


blarzgh posted:

So "adverse possession" is just a statute of limitations against people saying, "No, actually, I own that land over there."

Is Adverse Possession the legally codified form of Manifest Destiny?

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






toplitzin posted:

Is Adverse Possession the legally codified form of Manifest Destiny?

no that is just right of conquest.

To the extent the USA didnt buy the land directly.

Phil Moscowitz
Feb 19, 2007

Chief Justice of the United States of Anime



Civil law recognizes that similarity between adverse possession and statutes of limitation—they’re both called prescription.

Acquisitive prescription = adverse possession
Liberative prescription = statute of limitation

evilweasel
Aug 24, 2002



euphronius posted:

I dont think your example satisfies common law adverse possession.

The hostile possession element gets wonky

how is me fencing in part of your property so only I can access it not hostile, i have literally erected a barrier to prevent you from using your land and its hard to imagine a more clear infringement on your landowner rights

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






evilweasel posted:

how is me fencing in part of your property so only I can access it not hostile, i have literally erected a barrier to prevent you from using your land and its hard to imagine a more clear infringement on your landowner rights

Yeah you are reading the issues wrong. Thats a common problem when lay people try and interpret law jargon thought everyday definitions of words. As I mentioned take a dive into hostile possession for the nuances it can get into.

pseudanonymous
Aug 30, 2008

When you make the second entry and the debits and credits balance, and you blow them to hell.

Since we're talking about adverse possession... Theres like a 2 foot strip of land next to my garage that is my property, my neighbors built a concrete strip on it and planned to put wood there and then asked me if I wanted to paint my garage or anything before they stacked wood there and I was like well that's my property you put that concrete strip on.

I don't really care if they keep wood there, the piece of land is not accessible to me at all really, it's totally inexplicable they way the garage was originally built but,

If I let them stack wood on that concrete do I risk losing that piece of my property?

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






pseudanonymous posted:

Since we're talking about adverse possession... Theres like a 2 foot strip of land next to my garage that is my property, my neighbors built a concrete strip on it and planned to put wood there and then asked me if I wanted to paint my garage or anything before they stacked wood there and I was like well that's my property you put that concrete strip on.

I don't really care if they keep wood there, the piece of land is not accessible to me at all really, it's totally inexplicable they way the garage was originally built but,

If I let them stack wood on that concrete do I risk losing that piece of my property?

Not addressing your situation but generally giving someone a license to do something on the land in question defeats the hostile ownership element discussed above.

If you are concerned you need to hire a local attorney to discuss it. I have no idea what your situation actually is.

EwokEntourage
Jun 10, 2008

BREYER: Actually, Antonin, you got it backwards. See, a power bottom is actually generating all the dissents by doing most of the work.

SCALIA: Stephen, I've heard that speed has something to do with it.

BREYER: Speed has everything to do with it.


pseudanonymous posted:

Since we're talking about adverse possession... Theres like a 2 foot strip of land next to my garage that is my property, my neighbors built a concrete strip on it and planned to put wood there and then asked me if I wanted to paint my garage or anything before they stacked wood there and I was like well that's my property you put that concrete strip on.

I don't really care if they keep wood there, the piece of land is not accessible to me at all really, it's totally inexplicable they way the garage was originally built but,

If I let them stack wood on that concrete do I risk losing that piece of my property?

you could write a simple contract, both parties recognize this land belongs to you but you are allowing them to use the land for the storage of wood in exchange for consideration of one case of beer a year or some poo poo, sign it with witnesses

as long as you get along with your neighbors should be fine, and if he ever tries to claim it just say look we both signed this agreement so we both knew it was my property

Phil Moscowitz
Feb 19, 2007

Chief Justice of the United States of Anime



euphronius posted:

Yeah you are reading the issues wrong. Thats a common problem when lay people try and interpret law jargon thought everyday definitions of words. As I mentioned take a dive into hostile possession for the nuances it can get into.

Lol drat

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






with land you dont need contracts similar to other everyday scenarios.

Land law was invented 100s of years before contract law was invented in London law courts

Hot Dog Day #91
Jun 19, 2003



euphronius posted:

Yeah you are reading the issues wrong. Thats a common problem when lay people try and interpret law jargon thought everyday definitions of words. As I mentioned take a dive into hostile possession for the nuances it can get into.

Lmao - a white shoe bankruptcy lawyer is effectively a lay person when it comes to this stuff.

blarzgh
Apr 14, 2009

SNITCHIN' RANDY


Grimey Drawer

euphronius posted:

I dont think your example satisfies common law adverse possession.

The hostile possession element gets wonky

Hostile just means "looks like Brown intends to treat that property as if they own it." so, yeah, building a fence enclosing that strip into your own land typically will satisfy a jury that you "intended to treat the property as if you owned it."

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






blarzgh posted:

Hostile just means "looks like Brown intends to treat that property as if they own it." so, yeah, building a fence enclosing that strip into your own land typically will satisfy a jury that you "intended to treat the property as if you owned it."

not if the other party allows it as Ive been talking about above.

Also lol at bringing an adverse possession case in front of a jury.

Devor
Nov 30, 2004
Lurking more.

euphronius posted:

not if the other party allows it as Ive been talking about above.

Aren't you describing 'adverse' here?

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






"Im building my fence on your land rear end in a top hat!!"

"ok, sure whatever"

Adverse possession defeated!!

blarzgh
Apr 14, 2009

SNITCHIN' RANDY


Grimey Drawer

euphronius posted:

not if the other party allows it as Ive been talking about above.

Also lol at bringing an adverse possession case in front of a jury.

Yeah you are reading the issues wrong. Thats a common problem when non-real estate attorneys try and interpret law jargon thought everyday definitions of words. As I mentioned take a dive into the element of hostile possession for the nuances it can get into.

evilweasel
Aug 24, 2002



euphronius posted:

not if the other party allows it as Ive been talking about above.

Also lol at bringing an adverse possession case in front of a jury.

the other party didn't allow it in the situation, so unless you're in one of those wonky states where a poorly educated judge misunderstood the hostile element to require you know you have no right to the land, fencing in someone else's property to your own is basically the definition of hostile

"they did it, and i didn't object" doesn't count as allowing it for the purposes of the hostile element. you need to have given permission to do it, not failed to object (because the whole point of adverse possession is when you failed to object and nobody really noticed the error for years/decades)

evilweasel fucked around with this message at 16:25 on May 5, 2021

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






Ive considered your posts and am not persuaded.

blarzgh
Apr 14, 2009

SNITCHIN' RANDY


Grimey Drawer

euphronius posted:

Ive considered your posts and am not persuaded.

Me: "It is murder if you kill someone."
You: "Actually, it is not."

then, you, later: "BEcause its not murder if you don't kill them."

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009






blarzgh posted:

Me: "It is murder if you kill someone."
You: "Actually, it is not."

then, you, later: "BEcause its not murder if you don't kill them."

You should know that not all homicides are murder. Come on now.

I thought we were dealing from a position of mutual respect.

Nice piece of fish
Jan 29, 2008



Ultra Carp

euphronius posted:

Ive considered your posts and am not persuaded.

I am, I'm really persuaded. Like, by a lot.

Guess we two are a hung jury. Well in your case not all that hung.

blarzgh
Apr 14, 2009

SNITCHIN' RANDY


Grimey Drawer

euphronius posted:

You should know that not all homicides are murder. Come on now.

I thought we were dealing from a position of mutual respect.

I was hoping you'd respect my decision not to be a pendantic goon

Hot Dog Day #91
Jun 19, 2003



euphronius posted:

I dont think your example satisfies common law adverse possession.

The hostile possession element gets wonky

Another way to think of the "hostile" argument is "not permissive." Since nothing in blarzgh's hypo indicated that the fencing was permissive, and since it's an AP hypo, let's assume that it was "not permissive."

Point to blarzgh. Point to you for smacking EW. point to EW for being my bankruptcy bro.

judgment of death against Phil for being Phil.

Soylent Pudding
Jun 22, 2007

We've got people!


You know what's fun? Litigating the hostility element in a case involving adverse possession of a springing easement.

Mr. Nice!
Oct 13, 2005



I didn’t expect to open this thread and see such notorious posting.

Nice piece of fish
Jan 29, 2008



Ultra Carp

Soylent Pudding posted:

You know what's fun? Litigating the hostility element in a case involving adverse possession of a springing easement.

I know what's fun. Not litigating. Ever loving again.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Nice piece of fish
Jan 29, 2008



Ultra Carp

Mr. Nice! posted:

I didn’t expect to open this thread and see such notorious posting.

It's not very notarized. It has very little notoriety.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply