Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

no_hypocrisy

(45,774 posts)
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 04:57 PM Apr 2014

Do you think that Bundy is trying to get free federal land by adverse possession?

Know the real reason why the rancher is being evicted from federal land after 20 years?

Adverse possession.

If the rancher isn't evicted, he can make a claim that he now owns the land after 20 years because of continuous use of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

http://shwagr.com/posts/a-squatters-50-state-guide-to-stealing-property-by-adverse-possession

Tell me if I'm wrong and why.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Do you think that Bundy is trying to get free federal land by adverse possession? (Original Post) no_hypocrisy Apr 2014 OP
Adverse possession only applies to private property MohRokTah Apr 2014 #1
Thanks, that explains it. no_hypocrisy Apr 2014 #4
Free stuff? n/t safeinOhio Apr 2014 #2
Only if he was ignored for 20 years. HooptieWagon Apr 2014 #3
That's my guess as well. Ando Coyote Apr 2014 #8
He can't get it for free atreides1 Apr 2014 #5
There is no adverse possession against the government Gothmog Apr 2014 #6
I think he's just a freeloading asshole Trekologer Apr 2014 #7
 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
1. Adverse possession only applies to private property
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 04:59 PM
Apr 2014

The Feds are immune to any claims of adverse possession.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
3. Only if he was ignored for 20 years.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 05:03 PM
Apr 2014

That the BLM has gotten several court judgements against him means he can't claim adverse possession. Further, he probably doesn't want to pay property taxes 20 years in arrears... that could be more than the grazing fees. My guess is hes just a RW free-loader who wants to suck on the government teat.

Ando Coyote

(1 post)
8. That's my guess as well.
Mon Apr 21, 2014, 02:11 PM
Apr 2014

After reading the court judgments against Bundy from 1998 and 2013, my only question left on the matter was whether or not those judgments prevent him from any claim to adverse possession. It makes sense that they would since it has been ruled that his cattle are trespassing and he has been ordered to pay associated fines.

atreides1

(16,046 posts)
5. He can't get it for free
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 05:10 PM
Apr 2014

Generally, one cannot take title to state or federal lands by adverse possession. However, the federal Color of Title Act provides that a claimant who has met all four tests of adverse possession on public land may receive a patent to such land, provided the land does not exceed 160 acres and provided all taxes are paid. The United States, however, reserves the right to all coal and mineral rights to the property. In addition, title to Torrens-registered property usually cannot be taken by adverse possession.

The Color-of-Title Act provides that any individual, group, or corporation who has evidence giving the appearance of having title to public lands which are administered by the BLM, and legal title to the lands remains vested in the United States, may file a color-of-title claim to obtain ownership of the land. An applicant will receive a patent conveying clear title to the lands upon payment of the sale price of the lands if they meet the requirements for a class 1 or class 2 claim.

Bundy would still have to pay all the taxes due!

Trekologer

(994 posts)
7. I think he's just a freeloading asshole
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:23 PM
Apr 2014

He should graze his livestock on his own property or pay the fee and stop stealing from the taxpayers.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Do you think that Bundy i...