Legal Beagles of the Lounge: What's the term/concept for not-objecting-over-time...

[UTUSN]

sort of related to squatter's rights. Iow, A was using B's property in some way for X number of years and B had never objected, but eventually some dispute or further infringement led B to object and they went to court, but A's lawyer used the concept that so much time had gone by without B objecting that A had somehow established the right or possession. It's not "possession is nine tenths of the law," is it?

[Sheldon Cooper]

1. Easement?

Not a lawyer, so take it for what it's worth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement

An easement is a non-possessory right of use and/or enter onto the real property of another without possessing it. It is "best typified in the right of way which one landowner, A, may enjoy over the land of another, B".[1] It is similar to real covenants and equitable servitudes;[2] in the United States, the Restatement (Third) of Property takes steps to merge these concepts as servitudes.[3]

Easements are helpful for providing pathways across two or more pieces of property or allowing an individual to fish in a privately owned pond. An easement is considered as a property right in itself at common law and is still treated as a type of property in most jurisdictions.

The rights of an easement holder vary substantially among jurisdictions. Historically, the common law courts would enforce only four types of easement:

Right-of-way (easements of way)
Easements of support (pertaining to excavations)
Easements of "light and air"
Rights pertaining to artificial waterways
Modern courts recognize more varieties of easements, but these original categories still form the foundation of easement law.

[UTUSN]

4. Sounds very close, but my emphasis is less on "the RIGHT of use/enter" than on HOW it is TAKEN

Like, it's one thing for B to GIVE A permission to use or enter the property, but how A gets to keep the right because B NEVER OBJECTED for a period of long time.

[Sheldon Cooper]

8. I think I know what you're talking about, and I'm not sure it's called an easement.

When I was a teenager, my mom planted a big garden out in the backyard. Everything was fine until she planted another garden the following year. Turns out that during the first year she had inadvertently encroached about a foot into the neighbor's property. He didn't say anything the first time, but when it happened the next year he came over and told her she couldn't garden over the property line. She was pretty upset because she had no idea she'd trespassed. First time I ever saw my mom cry, and I was pissed. Someone told me that he was just protecting his property rights by making sure he nipped it in the bud, but I was still pretty angry about it.

Anyway, is this something like what you're talking about?

[UTUSN]

9. That's pretty much it. Might as well give the actual situation:

B was a brother of A. B's property ran along a public highway. A's property was "behind" B's and ever since both of them inherited from their father, a dirt road had crossed through the middle of B's land, leading directly to A's land/house. Forty years later A used political pals to PAVE the dirt road with county equipment and employees. B took him to court, and the decision was that all that time had gone by without B objecting to the (dirt) road. Somehow, the issue of A using county resources to PAVE the road was not addressed.

Also, ACCESS *must* be given to landlocked property, but there WAS access from another road at the far end of the two properties (not directly to the house). The middle road was just more convenient.

In your case, your neighbor would be B and your mom would be A, but your neighbor acted reasonably promptly so the results were the opposite of my case because of his promptness.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Estoppel.

In this case they'd probably call it estoppel by laches or estoppel by acquiescence. It means you are barred from asserting a right if you didn't object in a reasonable amount of time. You've also got a situation that might be either adverse possession or a prescriptive easement. Adverse possession occurs when someone has used your property claiming it as their own for a period of time (usually 15 years depending on jurisdiction) and you don't stop them; the use has to be open, hostile, notorious and under a claim of right. Easement are a little different - they don't claim to own the property but they've used it for long enough to establish the right to keep doing so.

[UTUSN]

6. Thanks, that sounds like it, although I thought there was a popular term

In the three definitions (below) from googling, the "TRANSACTION" part of Acquiescence moves away from my reference, because B and A never made a deal/transaction; B had started making use/entering and B had never objected (until too late).

I thought there might be a popular term like "squatters' rights"...


"Estoppel -- the principle that precludes a person from asserting something contrary to what is implied by a previous action or statement of that person or by a previous pertinent judicial determination.”

“Estoppel by laches is an equitable doctrine by which some courts deny relief to a claimant who has unreasonably delayed or been negligent in asserting a claim. A person invoking laches should assert that an opposing party has slept on his/her rights and that the party is no longer entitled to his/her original claim. Laches is a form of estoppel for delay. The following is an example of a case law defining estoppel by laches : Doctrine of estoppel by laches is the neglect or omission to assert a right for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, under circumstances prejudicial to an adverse party.(McNeir v. McNeir, 178 Va. 285, 291 (Va. 1941))”

”Acquiescence -- Conduct recognizing the existence of a transaction and intended to permit the transaction to be carried into effect; a tacit agreement; consent inferred from silence.”

[Downwinder]

3. Adverse possession ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

[Kali]

5. this ^^^

[UTUSN]

7. Yip, something like, had seen that when I googled "squatters rights". Thanks. n/t