real property
Memorandum
To: Reader
From: (paralegal)
Re: Mildred and Cliff have 3 acres of land in question where Cliff's fence takes up her property for dispute. Mildred has a deed executed 40 years ago and Cliff's claims he is the adverse possessor.
Mildred of Ohio organized her estate plan and had a survey done on her home; realizes that her neighbor Cliff's picket fence is 3 feet on her property line. Mildred has a deed executed over 40 years ago showing she acquired the property on the other hand Cliff's argument is that he is the adverse possessor. Neither one can remember when the fence was put up or before the fence was up, what was done with the property. You need to makeBebout. Peffers believed it was a mutual mistake that a boundary line was marked by fence, which leads to have the 3 acres in dispute. Peffers to the steps to remove the fence but there after Bebout acquired legal possession by adverse possession held in trial court, but law presumes possession of land under the regular title. In fact, to the true owner. The party that claimed adverse possession has the burden of proving all the elements of adversary. The court is in favor of Peffers, the true owner.
Another case similar to Bebout v. Peffers, the case of McConachie v. Meeks, 1999 Ohio App.Lexis 4736; McConachie was a fee simple owner of undivided interest of land and Meeks is a fee simple owner of the parcel of land. McConachie decides to quiet title to determine the boundary line between the parties. McConachie claims he used the disputed land for a long time with out hindrance and claimed he was the adverse possessor. When they went to trial the court dismissed his claim for adverse possessor of the disputed land because it was not exclusive, continuous, open or notorious, or adverse. Court in favor of the true owner Meeks.
While Mildred and Cliff have this dispute over whose
To: Reader
From: (paralegal)
Re: Mildred and Cliff have 3 acres of land in question where Cliff's fence takes up her property for dispute. Mildred has a deed executed 40 years ago and Cliff's claims he is the adverse possessor.
Mildred of Ohio organized her estate plan and had a survey done on her home; realizes that her neighbor Cliff's picket fence is 3 feet on her property line. Mildred has a deed executed over 40 years ago showing she acquired the property on the other hand Cliff's argument is that he is the adverse possessor. Neither one can remember when the fence was put up or before the fence was up, what was done with the property. You need to makeBebout. Peffers believed it was a mutual mistake that a boundary line was marked by fence, which leads to have the 3 acres in dispute. Peffers to the steps to remove the fence but there after Bebout acquired legal possession by adverse possession held in trial court, but law presumes possession of land under the regular title. In fact, to the true owner. The party that claimed adverse possession has the burden of proving all the elements of adversary. The court is in favor of Peffers, the true owner.
Another case similar to Bebout v. Peffers, the case of McConachie v. Meeks, 1999 Ohio App.Lexis 4736; McConachie was a fee simple owner of undivided interest of land and Meeks is a fee simple owner of the parcel of land. McConachie decides to quiet title to determine the boundary line between the parties. McConachie claims he used the disputed land for a long time with out hindrance and claimed he was the adverse possessor. When they went to trial the court dismissed his claim for adverse possessor of the disputed land because it was not exclusive, continuous, open or notorious, or adverse. Court in favor of the true owner Meeks.
While Mildred and Cliff have this dispute over whose