Land and Water - the Rights Interface - Case Study Example

Another example is a claim arising from another person's Last Will and Testament. Yet another common example is where two or more persons have received separate deeds to the same parcel of real estate." Black's Law (2006)."Unknown to the owner, a third person - a "squatter" - may be in illegal and unauthorized occupation of a far corner of the land parcel. If nothing is done to remove him, after a certain period of time the squatter may eventually acquire legal rights over the land parcel, or part of it.

Further, questions may arise as to the relationship between the formal owner of the land parcel, often a male, and other family members. What interests, if any, do women and other members of the owner's family hold in the land" Hodgson (2004).Second, does he have a reason to believe that he has a right to be there and keep the land Hill Bob may have been given a portion of the land through the title in a last will and testament? Third, how many years has he actually lived on the land Hill Bob would be able to claim adverse possession of a portion of the land if it were obvious that he could support that claim.

In Colorado, the duration of such possession is seven (7) years if the claimant claims under color of title. If the claimant does not make his/her claim under color of title, the duration of possession is eighteen (18) years. Colorado Code 38-41-101, 108, 109. Fourth, has he ever been told by a previous owner that in exchange for work completed to the land, a portion of the land belonged to him in exchange For example in a different state, the person claiming must past three tests. "Under the Limitations Act in Ontario, an owner's title to land can be extinguished by the adverse possession of another person for a period of 10 years.

In order for an adverse possession claim to succeed, the person claiming the disputed land must meet three tests. Throughout the entire 10-year period, he or she must have: had actual exclusive, open, and visible possession, had the intention to exclude the true owner from the possession, andeffectively excluded the true owner from possession."