Posted on 02/08/2007 8:51:38 PM PST by Proud_USA_Republican
Tell that to the police. Tell it to the judge and then the jury. Spend a fortune to defend yourself in Court. Go ahead. I double dare you.
California ain't what it used to be either, with all them transplants from the rest of the country.
That's a totally different scenario.
Look, the law really loves real property rights. If you own land, you've got a whole lot of rights that come with that land. One of the rights is the right to exclude all others from the land. Mind you, I would never ADVISE someone to engage in self-help to remove squatters, but it's a certainly a case I wouldn't mind defending.
When people enter your land without permission, they are trespassers. They have no rights AND they can be sued for trespassing--not that squatters would have any money or show up to court.
You are absolutely right that if someone who has rightful possession of the property--but fails to pay rent--must be evicted (an easy process in most states). But if someone just moves into a house and doesn't pay rent, they are trespassers. They are violating the law.
But hey, what do I know? I'm just an antitrust lawyer that does pro bono work for legal aid from time to time. Is there a landlord-tenant lawyer in the house?
"[a] trespasser who ousts the owner acquires no such possession as will entitle him to protection against an immediate forcible reentry . . . . What is required is 'something like acquiescence in the physical fact of his occupation on the part of the rightful owner.'" William L. Prosser, The Law of Torts § 23, at 124 (4th ed. 1971).
Dean Prosser, however, adds the following significant caveat:
"Mere delay in taking effective action, even for a period of months, will not make the entry [of the owner] tortious, where the owner has not discovered his dispossession, or has made persistent efforts to enter, but acquiescence or toleration of the wrongful possession, even for a day, may [give the trespasser right of possession]."
The moral of the story? So long as the property owner does not acquiese to the squatter's possession of the property, a property owner, at least in common law states, may use force to re-enter the property.
Waiving a gun or pulling a gun constitutes assault in virtually every state. When I said you reminded me of a guy I know before I was being polite. You were sounding like a hot head. The reasonable thing to do is call the police and ask them to go with you when you confront the squatter. Squatters have rights, too. Even though you claim they have no rights at all here on the FR forum. Everybody has the right not to be confronted by a hot head with a gun.
Like I said before, I wouldn't advise people to use self-help to remove squatters, but I'd feel really good about defending that case in court. I'd feel pretty confident with my position, considering that Dean Prosser--who, literally, wrote the book on torts, sides with me.
Everybody has the right not to be confronted by a hot head with a gun.
Really? So if someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, he has the right NOT to be confronted by an angry me with a gun? Strange world in which you live.
I meant to say that everybody who is not committing a crime has the right not to be confronted by a hot head with a gun.
You had better be sure you have proof the 'burglar' actually broke into your house. Mere trespassers cannot be shot on sight just because they were inside your home in most states. A drunk mistakenly entering your house is not a genuine threat to your property per se. You sound clever enough to make up a convincing story. But without a threatening gesture or verbal threat sufficient to put you in reasonable fear for your life (or the lives of your family), you do not have the absolute right to shoot. In some states, you would be arrested for shooting an unarmed intruded.
'Intruded' should have been 'intruder.' My bad.
Trespassing is a crime.
Look, ok, I've had enough, and I'm through debating it.
I feel that Dean Prosser's comment is clear: squatters do not obtain possessory rights such that would exclude an owner from making forcible re-entry. Prosser feels that squatters don't have a right to possession; that's good enough for me.
If you feel differently, that's fine--but I'll stick with Prosser.
You're more right than you know. Just yesterday I received a flyer from a Chappaqua real estate company that compiled the stats: The average sales price in the Chappaqua School District rose by 8.9% to $1,233,000, while the median price rode by 7.9%.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.