I think it is important to create more clarity in adverse possession law. While I have advocated for Good Faith and I have also considered whether we should look at who took possession first between the adverse possessor and the title holder here. As I really think the situation through, the most important point is
Good Faith: Then & (Hopefully) Now
Yesterday, I had the pleasure of testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding ESHB 1026. In that testimony and in my follow-up answers to questions posed by Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Adam Kline (D) – 37th Legislative District and Senator Mike Carrell (R) – 28th Legislative District, I advocated for the addition of
Good Faith Element v. Clear, Cogent, and Convincing Evidence
In my January 2011 Bar News article A Good Faith Attack on Land Thieves, I suggested that the best method to attempt to eliminate land theft allowed under the current laws would be to add the element of Good Faith to adverse possession’s 10 year common law statutory interpretation of RCW 4.16.020.
Well, today at
Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1026 Passes: 95 Yeas – 1 Nays – 0 Absent – 2 Excused
Earlier today, after improving Adverse Possession Substitute House Bill 1026 by rightfully vesting the power to determine equity with the Courts, as opposed to fact finders, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1026 was passed handily. For those who are curious, please find the roll call here and overall bill history here. Now onward to the Senate.
Is Adverse Possession Fundamentally Wrong?
People often get the impression from friends or relatives involved in land fights that adverse possession is fundamentally wrong. End Adverse Possession Now has done its best to further this point of view. Yet, how do I come down on this question?
Impartially, adverse possession is both fundamentally right AND at present fundamentally flawed. As such, the
Adverse Possession
Adverse Possession is the primary doctrine used to resolve boundary disputes. Its requirements, or legal elements, are:
- Actual Possession; that is
- Open & Notorious;
- Hostile; and
- Exclusive; held
- Continuously for the Statutory Period.
In essence what this means is that an adverse possessor needs to both sufficiently represent to others AND in actuality possess real property
House Judiciary Committee’s Public Hearing on HB 1026 – Part II
On Thursday, 2011.01.13, I testified to a few, but certainly not all, of my thoughts related to the proposed Adverse Possession bill – HB 1026. My thoughts were based on an effort to challenge what I perceive to be some of the weaknesses of the bill as presented, while still providing overall support for reform in
House Judiciary Committee’s Public Hearing on HB 1026 – Part I
Yesterday, Thursday 2011.01.13 at 10:00, the House Judiciary Committee opened session in House Hearing Room A in the O’Brien Building. House Judiciary Chairman, Rep. Jamie Pedersen (D) of the 43rd District presided. Vice Chairman, and friend from the University Rotary Club, Rep. Roger Goodman (D) of the 45th Legislative District, assisted the Chair
3, 2, 1 – BLAST OFF: Seahawks; BDLB; & Upcoming Public Comment on HB 1026 to the House Judiciary Committee
#3 Blast Off – On Saturday (2011.01.08), my father, brother, son and I witnessed a sporting event which is only topped in my mind by one other – The Miracle on Ice. Here though, the Seattle Seahawks, despite their losing record, were crowned the champions of the NFC West after beating St. Louis in the final
HB 1026: The Newly Proposed Adverse Possession Bill
I received a nice note from Washington’s 23rd Legislative District House Representative Christine Rolfes (D) yesterday. In addition to congratulating me on this month’s publication of my Bar News article, A Good Faith Attack on Land Thieves, she provided a link to the Adverse Possession legislation that she prefiled with 18th Legislative District House Representative Ed