Common Law Notice And Lien

ndusa · #1 08-12-2006, 09:31 PM

Not sure if I got this in the right place or not.

Here's what we are looking at:

A man and woman live together in town, in a house owned by her. She dies. Apperently the house was left to the daughter. Man stays in house for 7-8 years, doesn't pay the taxes. Nobody paid taxes.

Shyster gets ahold of case, give eviction notice to man for "trespassing", and tell's him to make a bid on the land if he likes. Current bid is $7500.00.

This is where we are. I bring up a lien for labor, upkeep, ect.. Told him to claim $1000.00/year, for a total of $7000.00. So give it to me people, what would happen if he did this? The shyster is representing the deceased woman's property. I have never dealt with putting a lien on, and do not wish to cause him problems(don't think it gets any worse than being tossed out on your ear!) Please give me idea's. Ohh, he has less than 30 days to get out of there. Not sure when the sale goes threw, or when the bidding ends. Just want to throw a wrench in the cogs here.

#2 08-12-2006, 09:37 PM

Does your state recognize 'squatters rights'?

Jerry

ndusa · #3 08-12-2006, 09:52 PM

Not sure what happened here, posted something and it never came up.

I don't know about 'squatters rights', so to blacks I went. Here is what I found:

Adverse use- Use without license or permission; an element necessary to acquire title or easement by ************. Shuggars v. Brake, 248 Md. 38, 234 A2d 752.

Now with that, I'm also looking at Adverse Possession. After reading that, it would appear as though this is for "claim" to the land. He doesn't want to do that, just want to give them a headache, and get something back for his time and money he invested. What do you think?

ndusa · #4 08-13-2006, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ndusa

Not sure what happened here, posted something and it never came up.

I don't know about 'squatters rights', so to blacks I went. Here is what I found:

Adverse use- Use without license or permission; an element necessary to acquire title or easement by ************. Shuggars v. Brake, 248 Md. 38, 234 A2d 752.

Now with that, I'm also looking at Adverse Possession. After reading that, it would appear as though this is for "claim" to the land. He doesn't want to do that, just want to give them a headache, and get something back for his time and money he invested. What do you think?

Jerrypits, the reason I put "adverse use", is when I looked up 'squatters rights', this is what I was directed to.

Now, here is Blacks for Common Law Lien: "One known to or granted by the common law, as distinguished from statutory, equitable, and maritime liens; also one arising by implication of law, as distinguished from one created by the agreement of the parties. It is a right extended to a person to retain that which is in his possession belonging to another, until the demand or charge of the person in possesion is paid or satisfied. Whiteside v. Rocky Mountain Fuel Co., C.C. A. Colo., 101 F.2d 765. 769"

So, I'm thinking this would be the way to go, or am I way off? I am just real unsure about this one.

georgealexander · #5 08-13-2006, 07:13 AM

You changed Adverse Possession - which would be open, notorious, hostile and PAYING TAXES - to adverse use. I do not know anything about adverse use.

Man and woman co-habitating (?) effect a common law marriage. Had he simply been a 'roomer' living in a shack in the back yard, that would be another matter.

The woman obviously died with a will and left the house to the daughter. What does the daughter have to say about the past 7-8 years.

I would assume a lack of interest due to geography on the daughter's part and the actions of the attorney may be that of expediency.

Your comments about 'a bid' sounds like it is in tax foreclosure. The daughter may not know what is going on right now and the local attorney has been going to lunch with the county/city treasurer. Quid pro quo: I'll buy lunch; you bring those tax deeds in delinquincy.

Are they 'moving' New Town again??? B-)

George Alexander

ndusa · #6 08-13-2006, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgealexander

You changed Adverse Possession - which would be open, notorious, hostile and PAYING TAXES - to adverse use. I do not know anything about adverse use.

Man and woman co-habitating (?) effect a common law marriage. Had he simply been a 'roomer' living in a shack in the back yard, that would be another matter.

The woman obviously died with a will and left the house to the daughter. What does the daughter have to say about the past 7-8 years.

I would assume a lack of interest due to geography on the daughter's part and the actions of the attorney may be that of expediency.

Your comments about 'a bid' sounds like it is in tax foreclosure. The daughter may not know what is going on right now and the local attorney has been going to lunch with the county/city treasurer. Quid pro quo: I'll buy lunch; you bring those tax deeds in delinquincy.

Are they 'moving' New Town again??? B-)

George Alexander

The letter doesn't say it's for taxes. Thats where I'm confussed. The City shyster handed the guy this notice of eviction. The whole thing seems odd to me.

I still want to know about common law notice, and lien, and what will happen when you file one.

As far as the def. I posted, those are out of black's law dictionary. I may have misspelled some of it, as I wasn't looking what I was typing. But, I find no definition that you speak of for adverse use, which doesn't suprise me in the least.

Common law marriage? Where are you comming up with this? They would have had to agree to a marriage for it to be common law marriage. As usual, drag the thread out, staying as far from the original question as possible. Your next on the ingore list. With that, STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY THREADS, YOUR NOT NEEDED, WANTED NOR WERE YOU EVER ASKED!

The tax part makes no sense to me. NOBODY paid it. The daughter doesn't want it. Not sure if she's getting some money or not. I just felt a lien would be appropriate for this type of thing, but no body can seem to answer that here.

Blacks--Adverse Possession-"A method of acquisition of title to real property by possession for a statutory period under certain conditions. Lowery v. garfield County, 122 Mont. 571, 208 P.2d 478, 486. It has been described as the statutuory method of acquiring title to land by limitations. Field v. Sosby, Tex.Civ. App., 226 S.W.2d 484, 486. Blacks law Centennial Ed. (1891-1991)

Livefire · #7 08-13-2006, 07:45 PM

Is this lawyer representing the estate or the city??? If its the city attorney, the dude could get the daughter to quit claim the property to him in exchange for paying the back taxes and then have title to the property. Could get a little sticky thru probate but workable.

ndusa · #8 08-13-2006, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livefire

Is this lawyer representing the estate or the city??? If its the city attorney, the dude could get the daughter to quit claim the property to him in exchange for paying the back taxes and then have title to the property. Could get a little sticky thru probate but workable.

Live,
Man, I wish I had that letter with me. Its so informal, it makes no sense! I guess the shyster is representing the estate. But, it's not mentioned that it is up for bid on taxes. All he says in the letter, is that he represents the estate, there is a bid, and this guy could make one. The only mention of the daughter is to return the mothers belongings.

The common law lien is what he needs to do, but then he may get stuck with it, or in return, they will put it up for bid on taxes. (He pissed this shyster off, and now he's doing all he can to get even) Basically, the shyster and the trucking company trying to buy it are trying to do this just between them. If I ever get time off, I will scan and post this letter, people in here will have a hay day with it!

ndusa · #9 08-14-2006, 03:48 AM

Squatters have no rights in ND, so better not even bring that up to him. Common law notice and lien is his only alternative to just walking away at this point.

Maybe I should go put a bid in for $25,000.00 on the last day, if the shyster starts crying, I could always file a Writ for Trial by Combat.

I'm sure if I do that, the coward will hide and forget all about it.

georgealexander · #10 08-14-2006, 06:26 AM

Suijuris.net provides a free-thought venue for its members to engage in open discussion as well as debate regarding the research that makes its way into our digital collective.

quote ndusa:
".... As usual, drag the thread out, staying as far from the original question as possible. Your next on the ingore list. With that, STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY THREADS, YOUR NOT NEEDED, WANTED NOR WERE YOU EVER ASKED!"

I am a member.

I think I'll tip my hat and slowly stroll away.

George Alexander