Class Abstract Services
  • Home
  • Services
  • Searches & Fees
  • About
  • Forms
    • Title Order Form
    • TP-584 - April 2013
  • Contact
    • Resources >
      • News >
        • NYLJ News Feed

Adverse Possession Found Established by Beachfront Owner Who Built on Property Both He and His Neighbors Thought Was His

8/9/2012

1 Comment

 
          Beachfront property in Babylon on Long Island contained the parcels at issue here, owned by the town but leased out long term to the parties involved in this dispute.  The plaintiff in this declaratory action is the estate of P, one of the lessees.

          In the 1960's jetties were built to combat erosion.  On what he thought was his own parcel, P then built a boardwalk and dock.  Turns out that he was actually building astride the dividing line between his parcel and G's, but eve G thought it was just P's.

           Based on longstanding friendship and with no one ever contesting P's ownership - or, to coin a phrase for this case, leaseship - P let G and other neighbors use the dock and boardwalk for years, more years than enough to satisfy the 10-year period applicable to adverse possession.

           Potential trouble started in 1984, when G had her parcel surveyed and only then learned that P's structure had encroached five feet onto hers.  She showed the survey to P and she deposed, they both "had a good laugh about it".  She let P continue to use the property just as before.  The actual trouble arrived only after G sold her parcel to Ds (defendants here), who then advised P that he could no longer use the portion of the structure that they deemed theirs.  It produced this declaratory action by P, Estate of Becker v. Murtagh, 19 N.Y.3d 75, 945 N.Y.S.2d 196 (April 3, 2012), and P wins it.
          Turns out that G's post-survey kindness about letting P continue to use the property in the same way as before was, however generous, no real favor to P, because - under the Court's holding - by 1984 P's right had ripened into outright ownership ("leaseship") through adverse possession.
           In an opinion by Judge Jones, the Court reviews in depth the elements needed for adverse possession and finds them all met here in that the occupation was (1) hostile, (2) actual, (3) open and notorious, (4) exclusive, and (5) continuous for the required period.
           The Court finds only elements (1) (hostility) and (4) (exclusivity) in dispute here and resolves both in P's favor.
           Hostility need not involve enmity, the Court shows, highlighting the fact that while P allowed some friends and neighbors to use the dock and boardwalk, "he did not grant such access to the general public".  In present context that establishes both adequate "hostility" and "exclusivity".
1 Comment

Transfer of Real Property by a Minor | Courtesy of FNT

4/17/2012

1 Comment

 
By: Dennis Chorny, AVP, Counsel

     On September 1, 1974 the age of majority was changed from twenty one years to eighteen years (General Obligations Law section 3-101). As a result, any person under the age of eighteen is deemed to be a minor and, under Real Property Law Section 11 is precluded from transferring an indefeasible estate or interest in real property.

     A purchase or conveyance made by a minor is not void, but is voidable at the minor’s option after reaching the age of majority. The minor can disaffirm the transaction even if the property was re-conveyed to an innocent purchaser. Under Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 208 the minor’s right to disaffirm a transaction is capped to within three years after reaching the age of majority. Nevertheless, the minor must disaffirm the transaction within a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority because a failure to do so will be deemed an affirmance of the transaction (Beardsley v. Hotchkiss, 96 N.Y. 201 (1884)).

     Married minors are an exception to the rule of voidability. Under General Obligations Law Section 3-101(3), a husband and wife, both of whom are minors, have the power to acquire, mortgage or transfer real property occupied or intended to be used as a home.

     To avoid the possibility that the minor might disaffirm the transaction, the conveyance must be made pursuant to a court order. Once a conveyance is made pursuant to a properly obtained court order, a minor cannot disaffirm the conveyance. Proper court authorization can be obtained in either surrogate’s court under Article 17 of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act, or alternatively, in the supreme or county court under Article 17 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law.

     In surrogate’s court, the application must be made by a court appointed guardian and it must be made to the surrogate’s court of the county that appointed the guardian. In supreme or county court, the petition can be made by the minor’s guardian, by any relative or other person on behalf of the minor, or by a minor 14 years or over in the minor’s own behalf. If the petition is made by someone other than the minor and the minor is 14 years or older, then the minor must join in the petition.     Regardless of which procedure is used, it is important to remember that the transaction itself must be approved by a court order. It is not enough that a guardian is appointed to manage the affairs of the minor. Although a guardian typically has broad powers, he may not sell the minor’s property without specific court approval.

     Once the transaction is approved, the proper party to the deed is the minor but the guardian executes the deed on behalf of the minor in the following manner:

               S/ John Minor
               By: S/ Joe Guardian
               Guardian of John Minor, as minor

     If the real property is held by a custodian for a minor under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act or, if after September 3, 1997, under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (Estates, Powers and Trusts Law “EPTL” Section 7-6), then the custodian can transfer the property without first obtaining court approval. “A custodian, acting in a custodial capacity, has all the rights, powers, and authority over custodial property that unmarried adult owners have over their own property, but a custodian may exercise those rights, powers, and authority in that capacity only”(EPTL Section 7-6.13).

     The prior deed into the custodian must specifically recite that the property was conveyed to the custodian pursuant to the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act, or if after September 3, 1997, pursuant to the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act (EPTL Section 7-6.9(a)(5)). 
1 Comment

Great Form!

3/9/2009

0 Comments

 
We are proud to announce the full functionality of our Forms page. Upon reading our disclaimer on the Forms page, please feel free to access and put to use any of our documents that can help you, your business, or your client. Thank you very much for taking the time to stop by ClassAbstractServices.com.  
0 Comments

    Recent Posts

    • 1031 Exchanges
    • Real Property Transfers
    • Credit Combat
    • Notary Public Ethics

    Archives

    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    January 2011
    September 2010
    August 2010
    December 2009
    March 2009

    Categories

    All
    Article
    Credit
    Helpful Tips
    Launch
    News
    Real Property

    RSS Feed

Search Class Abstract


Contact Us
Phone: (516) 294-4141

Fax:  (516) 294-4600

Email:  info@classabstractservices.com

    Questions & Comments

Submit

Location

© Copyright 2019 Class Abstract Services, Inc.