Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Sale of property during period of adverse possession does not reset statute of limitations
by
Blair, Benjamin A
in
Court decisions
/ Estate boundaries
/ Statutes of limitations
2024
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Sale of property during period of adverse possession does not reset statute of limitations
by
Blair, Benjamin A
in
Court decisions
/ Estate boundaries
/ Statutes of limitations
2024
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Sale of property during period of adverse possession does not reset statute of limitations
Journal Article
Sale of property during period of adverse possession does not reset statute of limitations
2024
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Recent Court Decisions on Real Estate and Valuation In June 2005, Pui Ho (Ho) purchased a home in Bristow, Virginia. On appeal, Ho contended that the period of time necessary to acquire an interest in property by adverse possession begins to run when the property interest is sufficiently invaded and continues to run regardless of any intervening sale by the rightful owner to someone else. [...]the trial court erred in sustaining Rahman's plea in bar that the fifteen-year statute of limitations could not have run against him because he had not owned the property for fifteen years. Not every instance of land possession has the potential to ripen into a claim of ownership, even if that possession has persisted for fifteen or more years. Because much remained to be proven in a trial court, the court remanded the case for further proceedines.
Publisher
Appraisal Institute
Subject
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.