[WSBAPT] adverse possession tacking

[Mike Winslow]

Consider another approach to this issue: Breach of Warranty under the
warranties contained in the deed of conveyance when the title was conveyed,
if your client is the party harmed by the encroachment. Breach of Warranty
is relatively easy to prove. It sounds like the legal description in the
deed does not conform with the lines of occupation. So that implicates a
breach of warranty of title claim.
 
Under your facts in appears there is a question about whether the parties
understood that the area of the encroachment was intended to be conveyed to
the grantee.
Also it appears that this conveyance would be subject to an action for
reformation of the legal description to conform to the lines of occupation,
assuming the grantor did not intend to reserve the area where the
encroachment exists.
 
The doctrine of merger is typically applied to titles where easements or
rights of use/negative covenants burden a parcel, for which there is a later
unity of title. Merger also is applied to mortgage liens, where title of the
borrower and lender become concurrent, thus extinguishing the lien. Under
those types of matters, merger is a question of intent according to the
court cases.
 
If this were an easement case, I would be looking at the doctrine of merger,
but since it sounds more like an issue with the intended legal description
when the common ownership was severed, I would look to the approaches
suggested above.
 
Michael A. Winslow
1204 Cleveland Ave.
Mount Vernon, WA 98273
Ph. 360-336-3321
Em. Mike at winslegal.com
 
This message is from an attorney, so it's confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, it's too late to stop reading this message, but you may
not use it for any improper purpose. Huge Disclaimer available upon request.
 
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
[mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of
joyce at schwensenlaw.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2018 12:54 PM
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBAPT] adverse possession tacking
 
I think the answer to this is pretty obvious but I want to check my gut. 
 
There is an adverse encroachment of improvements from one parcel onto the
neighboring parcel. Both parcels eventually come into common ownership.
Later common owner sells the two parcels separately. New owners with adverse
possession claim have not yet owned their property for 10 years. Did the
common ownership end the adverse possession so that the new owners cannot
tack the time of their adverse possession to any time prior to their
ownership?
 
Thank you very much.
 
Joyce Schwensen
 
Law Office of Joyce S. Schwensen
Joyce S. Schwensen, PS
12055 15th Ave NE
Seattle, WA  98125 
Tel: (206) 367-1065
Fax: (425) 324-3335 
 <mailto:Joyce at SchwensenLaw.com> Joyce at SchwensenLaw.com
 <http://www.schwensenlaw.com/> www.SchwensenLaw.com
 
PLEASE NOTE NEW ADDRESS: 12055 15TH AVE. NE, SEATTLE, WA 98125.
 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: 
This communication (including any attachments) is confidential and may
contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient or believe that you may have received this communication in error,
please delete this communication from your computer and do not retransmit,
copy, print or otherwise disseminate this communication.
ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP:
This e-mail does not in any way intend to provide legal advice to be relied
upon by any recipient and does not create any duty or obligation for legal
representation on behalf of the sender Joyce S. Schwensen, PS on behalf of
the recipient of this e-mail without a written engagement agreement.
REFERRALS:
Please note that no referral by this law firm to other legal professionals
is intended as a guaranty or assurance as to the experience, ability,
professionalism or other characteristics of such legal professionals.
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20181114/1371c1a5/attachment.html>