- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Hypothetical Property Law in Louisiana...
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:00 pm
I've got this friend....
He and his friend own this house together. They occupied the residence together for 6 years before they decided to not be friends anymore. Friend A lived in the house for 1 year post fallout. Friend B moved in about a year after Friend A moved out and has occupied for the past 17 years....
Now that company C has decided that the property is worth something and has made an offer to Friend B....does Friend A have any legal right, having had nothing to do with the house, other than having his name on it for the last 17 years...?
He and his friend own this house together. They occupied the residence together for 6 years before they decided to not be friends anymore. Friend A lived in the house for 1 year post fallout. Friend B moved in about a year after Friend A moved out and has occupied for the past 17 years....
Now that company C has decided that the property is worth something and has made an offer to Friend B....does Friend A have any legal right, having had nothing to do with the house, other than having his name on it for the last 17 years...?
6
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:04 pm to AUjim
quote:
does Friend A have any legal right, having had nothing to do with the house, other than having his name on it for the last 17 years...?
Well of course.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:05 pm to AUjim
quote:
does Friend A have any legal right,
yes, he owns 1/2 the house
get a lawyer
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:18 pm to lsujro
Yeah.....Friend B thinks this is nonsense and that Friend A should just sign away all rights....
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:33 pm to AUjim
The 17 years might make this tricky. But yeah get a lawyer.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:36 pm to castorinho
quote:
The 17 years might make this tricky. But yeah get a lawyer.
How so? If he's on the deed/mortgage whatever then he owns whatever the original agreement says.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:43 pm to Mingo Was His NameO
I don't know anything about this. I'm under the impression that there are laws that could favor the other guy.
Some version of squatting laws, if you will.
Certainly, if you factor in maintenance, I highly doubt that he can end up with his whole original 50%.
But like I said, I don't know shite about this, just thinking outloud.
Some version of squatting laws, if you will.
Certainly, if you factor in maintenance, I highly doubt that he can end up with his whole original 50%.
But like I said, I don't know shite about this, just thinking outloud.
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:52 pm to castorinho
quote:
Certainly, if you factor in maintenance, I highly doubt that he can end up with his whole original 50%.
Good point. I don't really either. Now that I'm thinking about it I'm interested. I'm guessing they probably didn't form an llc so theres no contributions, per se. I honestly am not sure what would happen.
Posted on 5/18/18 at 4:59 pm to AUjim
Friend A has whatever ownership percentage that's specified in the paperwork from when the 2 friends originally bought the house together.
If Friend B is upset that he's been paying mortgage/insurance/taxes/maintenance by himself for the past 17 years, then Friend B would have to sue Friend A to try to recoup some of that money from Friend A's share of the sale proceeds.
ETA: but then Friend A could argue that he was entitled to "rent" from Friend B for the past 17 years also
If Friend B is upset that he's been paying mortgage/insurance/taxes/maintenance by himself for the past 17 years, then Friend B would have to sue Friend A to try to recoup some of that money from Friend A's share of the sale proceeds.
ETA: but then Friend A could argue that he was entitled to "rent" from Friend B for the past 17 years also
This post was edited on 5/18/18 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 5/19/18 at 9:42 pm to Tiger Prawn
No "adverse possession" law in Louisiana?
10 years in the 'Sip.
10 years in the 'Sip.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 10:15 pm to matthew25
quote:
No "adverse possession" law in Louisiana?
There is, but without knowing more it doesn't appear to be the case here.
A co-owner would basically need to give his other co-owner notice that he is now possessing the entire property as his own to begin "possessing adversly" and for the clock to start to run. Also he would need 30 years of possession. 10 year delay period is more stringent and requires good faith in LA.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 11:55 pm to AUjim
quote:
Friend A has whatever ownership percentage that's specified in the paperwork from when the 2 friends originally bought the house together.
Tell your friend to tell his lawyer all the facts.
Posted on 5/20/18 at 7:42 am to AUjim
Were these friends married to each other at any point? That’s another wrinkle.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 11:33 am to matthew25
quote:
No "adverse possession" law in Louisiana?
10 years in the 'Sip.
If Friend A is on the original Act of Sale, and Friend B knows that Friend A is on the original Act of Sale, then Friend B would have to adversely possess the property for 30 years for adverse acquisitive prescription to run, as Friend B would be in bad faith possession. Friend A would have a strong argument that he was merely allowing Friend B to precariously possess the property in exchange for Friend B making the monthly mortgage payment. Friend A is relieved of the burden of making the mortgage payment while Friend B enjoys living in the home.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 3:12 pm to SetTheMood
quote:
If Friend A is on the original Act of Sale, and Friend B knows that Friend A is on the original Act of Sale, then Friend B would have to adversely possess the property for 30 years for adverse acquisitive prescription to run, as Friend B would be in bad faith possession. Friend A would have a strong argument that he was merely allowing Friend B to precariously possess the property in exchange for Friend B making the monthly mortgage payment. Friend A is relieved of the burden of making the mortgage payment while Friend B enjoys living in the home.
There is a legal presumption.... you know what, this is close enough
Posted on 5/22/18 at 10:35 pm to hungryone
Friend A and friend B were indeed married to one another at the time of purchase.
Posted on 5/23/18 at 4:45 am to AUjim
Haha and there is the twist!
Posted on 5/23/18 at 12:06 pm to C
yeah....in trying to not sway any opinion, that detail may or may not have been vitally important to all the good guidance received...and may or may not change it....my 'friend' is actually not me, but is a family member and I will undoubtedly end up being sucked into this vortex of drama
Posted on 5/23/18 at 2:30 pm to AUjim
Yeah, I'd say that was a pretty important detail.
So they got divorced and (somehow) didn't resolve this property issue?
So they got divorced and (somehow) didn't resolve this property issue?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News