Couple loses land to squatter's rights law

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I wonder how many places still have homesteaders' laws in place?

This is adverse possession and is different from homesteaders laws. I'm pretty sure most states still have laws allowing adverse possession.

[Adeptus_Minor]

Kinda puts the cranky old southern gentleman waving his shotgun and saying "Get off my property!" in perspective, doesn't it?

[z06boy]

Originally Posted by Adeptus_Minor

Kinda puts the cranky old southern gentleman waving his shotgun and saying "Get off my property!" in perspective, doesn't it?

Damn right !! Oh wait...you said shotgun.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by goof2

This is adverse possession and is different from homesteaders laws. I'm pretty sure most states still have laws allowing adverse possession.

My mistake on terminology. In checking it appears that, where homestead law used to be something that permitted settlement of untenanted land, it now involves putting a stop to forced sale in order to satisfy debts when one spouse dies. Interesting.

I was thinking about all of those open tracts of land in places like Montana and Arizona where old settlement laws may still be in force, that would see people losing land that might have been in their families for generations.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

My mistake on terminology. In checking it appears that, where homestead law used to be something that permitted settlement of untenanted land, it now involves putting a stop to forced sale in order to satisfy debts when one spouse dies. Interesting.

I was thinking about all of those open tracts of land in places like Montana and Arizona where old settlement laws may still be in force, that would see people losing land that might have been in their families for generations.

Homesteaders laws usually don't apply if the land is already privately owned. Adverse possession laws enable privately owned land to transfer, but require a longer "possession" period. The large tracts you speak of could transfer, but it would require someone continuously using a large portion of the land for a long time. Someone couldn't just come in, put a small shed in one corner to live in, and take the whole lot. It isn't particularly easy to take hundreds or thousands of acres.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by goof2

Homesteaders laws usually don't apply if the land is already privately owned. Adverse possession laws enable privately owned land to transfer, but require a longer "possession" period. The large tracts you speak of could transfer, but it would require someone continuously using a large portion of the land for a long time. Someone couldn't just come in, put a small shed in one corner to live in, and take the whole lot. It isn't particularly easy to take hundreds or thousands of acres.

Actually if you do a search, as I stated it appears that the term "homesteader law" has been co-opted to now mean a group of laws that are intended to help a spouse retain ownership of a home, rather than it being foreclosed upon and sold off to satisfy debts, when the spouse who is the owner of record dies.

Certainly not but nice parcels along a river, for example, could start to be taken. It would piss me off no end to find out that the best sections of land that I owned had essentially been stolen by someone.