Re: Hardly worthwhile

1

They say that the best comment threads take the longest to get started.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:31 AM
horizontal rule
2

They're wrong, though.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
3

But after 10 years, you can claim the post as your own, if you've been commenting, right?


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:40 AM
horizontal rule
4

Twenty in North Dakota.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:41 AM
horizontal rule
5

I'd be kind of surprised if the rule has even been invoked within the last century.


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:51 AM
horizontal rule
6

5: really? You know, the 20th century just arrived in ND.


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:56 AM
horizontal rule
7

I'd be kind of surprised if the rule has even been invoked within the last century.

I'd guess it has been. Probably not by jolly/murderous hobos, but surveying errors, which can go undetected for years, fall under this sort of statute.


Posted by: Matt F | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:15 PM
horizontal rule
8

Adverse possession is totally a Protestant concept, too. I'm surprised the period is so damn long.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:19 PM
horizontal rule
9

My grandfather owned a piece of land in Dakota. It turns out that there were no water or water rights, and possibly not even access by road. He dreamed of that land for decades, but when he died it proved impossible to even sell. Maybe some farmer is preparing his claim.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:20 PM
horizontal rule
10

How did he acquire the land?


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:21 PM
horizontal rule
11

I think that adverse possession and related legal forms were frequently used to dispossess black property owners in the South.

By all means, buy the house!


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:22 PM
horizontal rule
12

He bought it, probably before 1950 or maybe even before 1930. My guess is that it was the ND equivalent of the famous Florida swamp acres.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:23 PM
horizontal rule
13

surveying errors, which can go undetected for years, fall under this sort of statute

OK that I will believe.


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:25 PM
horizontal rule
14

when he died it proved impossible to even sell. Maybe some farmer is preparing his claim

Wouldn't the state seize the land due to lack of property tax payment?


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:27 PM
horizontal rule
15

12: Probably. There's some land in Arizona like that; it's advertised widely, but basically worthless because there's no water or road access.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
16

...yet.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:35 PM
horizontal rule
17

14: The State of North Dakota is dumb, maybe, but probably not that dumb.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:36 PM
horizontal rule
18

Also, people often have property that they don't really visit or check on for, basically, ever, and then if someone's been using it, poof, there you go, adverse possession.

And then sometimes people sue for adverse possession of like 8 inches of driveway, 'cause they're tools.

I hate property law so, so much. It's arcane, boring, and all the people, plaintiffs and defendants, are petty, annoying motherfuckers.


Posted by: m. leblanc | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:52 PM
horizontal rule
19

I have a question about the notoriety requirement of adverse possession, actually. Does it have to in fact be notorious, or just the sort of thing that would be notorious if your neighbors ever checked in? I mean, maybe they're never around either, or are profoundly uncurious, or something. Do you have to go out of your way to let people know that you're using the property?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:58 PM
horizontal rule
20

So does "notorious" mean something like "infamous", or just "nefarious"?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 12:59 PM
horizontal rule
21

So if I pee in someone's yard for 20 years I own it?


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:01 PM
horizontal rule
22

Something like "infamous".


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:03 PM
horizontal rule
23

Someone answer my goddam law question!


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:16 PM
horizontal rule
24

huh.

my grandfather makes his income buying florida swamp acres from government back-taxes auctions, and selling them.


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:20 PM
horizontal rule
25

So does "notorious" mean something like "infamous", or just "nefarious"?

More like "obvious". You can't discreetly camp out in a well-concealed tunnel in the backyard and call it your own after a few years.


Posted by: Matt F | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:21 PM
horizontal rule
26

Yeah, the "notorious" is part of the phrase "open and notorious." Which means that if anyone walked by, they would see that you were on the land. You aren't trying to conceal your occupation from others.


Posted by: m. leblanc | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:25 PM
horizontal rule
27

The State of North Dakota is dumb, maybe, but probably not that dumb

What do they care it isn't like they have to pay taxes on it. They can just let it sit at auction and maybe sell it cheap maybe not. Then if someone buys it they can get taxes again until they abandon it and then seize again repeat.


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:37 PM
horizontal rule
28

A fine scheme, but you need a steady supply of doubly-stupid people who want to buy a.) worthless b.) North Dakota property. In 1930 when my grandfather probably bought it ND was still thought to have a future, but every decade since then people have realized more strongly that ND doesn't.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:41 PM
horizontal rule
29

A fine scheme, but you need a steady supply of doubly-stupid people

a) There is a large and ever replenishing supply of these people

b) Even if there wasn't, it still isn't any loss to the state. Owning the land for them is basically cost free.


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 1:50 PM
horizontal rule
30

Check out EBay. There you find not only people willing to buy anything, but plenty of North Dakota land of questionable value.

The state and its local governments do engage in a constant cycle of repossession and auction as more and more land is abandoned either by choice or because a family dies out.

North Dakota, the state, is not dumb. Some of the people who run it, are. And yes, I live here, by choice, though I'm not a native. For now. Sometimes you take the job you can get.


Posted by: raksasi | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 2:02 PM
horizontal rule
31

Two actual North Dakotans now! Next time I visit my brother I'll post from Fargo.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 2:09 PM
horizontal rule
32

"Two" s/b "both".


Posted by: DaveL | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 2:27 PM
horizontal rule
33

5: The rule has been invoked in ND during disputes involving railroads and easements. Frankly, I don't even understand the issues involved, but there you go.

But your more traditional adverse possession fact pattern does come up from time to time. Here, for instance, is one such case; alas, the claimant was unsuccessful.


Posted by: NCProsecutor | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 2:34 PM
horizontal rule
34

The rule has been invoked in ND during disputes involving railroads and easements

Interesting, I guess it comes up more often then I thought.


Posted by: CJB | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 2:56 PM
horizontal rule
35

"Easement" sounds like constipation-related medical terminology. But "consortium" sounds about like what it is.

"Care from some consortium tonight, little lady -- heh, heh, heh."


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 3:59 PM
horizontal rule
36

"Care for some consortium.....?"


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:05 PM
horizontal rule
37

Am I the only one who has to make at least one trip to Wikipedia before being able to understand any of Ben's posts?

At least I'm learning a lot about obscure music and farms.


Posted by: orangatan | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:06 PM
horizontal rule
38

I would have to go to wikipedia if I had any desire to understand ben's posts. I do not, however, have any such desire.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:37 PM
horizontal rule
39

Teo! How cruel you are!


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:52 PM
horizontal rule
40

A lack of desire explains much about our young Teofilo.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:54 PM
horizontal rule
41

He actually desires to understand Ben's posts, but he's too shy to make the effort.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:55 PM
horizontal rule
42

He's sitting quietly by himself, showing no expression on his face while his mind is shouting "Ben's posts! Please explain yourselves to me! Maybe I love you!"


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 4:57 PM
horizontal rule
43

Railroads got lots of land (grants) that wasn't worth much but didn't/don't like to give it up for no compensation.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 5:14 PM
horizontal rule
44

39-42 get it exactly right. It's like you've known me my whole life.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 9:53 PM
horizontal rule
45

Hey, you're well on the way to the relationship-free life. On the other hand, it's not too late to change, and plunge into the hell of relationships.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 10:38 PM
horizontal rule
46

Teo, you should print out Ben's posts, then take them to the laundromat and ask the smart-looking young women there if they could help you decipher them.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 10:40 PM
horizontal rule
47

"Ma'am, I'm having this problem with in media res"


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
48

No smart-looking young women at the laundromat here, at least that I've noticed. It's far away, so I just use the laundry room in my apartment complex.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 09-12-07 11:12 PM
horizontal rule
49

Re: 32

Dave, close, but not quite. "Both" NoDakers under AARP age, maybe, though.


Posted by: raksasi | Link to this comment | 09-13-07 3:06 PM
horizontal rule
50

Come now. There are many NoDakers under AARP age: in Chicago, DC, LA, the Twin Cities...
I view them as evangelists, on lifetime missions to bring the joys of lye-treated cod and potato flatbread to the masses.


Posted by: Voice and Exit | Link to this comment | 09-17-07 12:29 AM
horizontal rule