@jph?ÿ
I know nothing about California AP (except what's been related here), only a little about Montana's. But, I think you are answering the question, at least partly, why it's difficult to win an AP case in either.?ÿ
AP is often looked down upon by the judiciary and I believe some judges will look for anyway to avoid it or rule against it. But, if the elements are met they may rule in favor.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿ
Unless you're a judge doing it.....
?ÿ
https://www.dailycamera.com/2009/08/14/boulders-infamous-land-grab-case-settled/
@jph Yes, they most definitely did believe that they had legitimate titles to the land, long prior to taking their claims to court. Massachusetts does not require ignorance on the part of the possessor. In one case, I got a look inside the file at Land Court, and saw that the neighbors provided testimony in support of the claim. In the second case, it was resolved fairly quickly (within 2 or 3 years after my company discovered the problem during a survey) and without any appeals, so I believe it was also unopposed. The whole purpose of these cases was to establish a marketable title, since there were no deeds on record for the current owners.
Again, very interesting.?ÿ I'm not at all familiar with courts, fortunately, I guess.?ÿ
I've heard of quiet title actions, and that seems more appropriate for your examples.?ÿ But the AP approach obviously worked for them.?ÿ And maybe they're almost the same thing, depending on the circumstances, how the lawyer presented it, and how receptive the judge is.?ÿ Thanks
@jim-frame?ÿ ?ÿFlorida also. You almost have to want to lose your property.
