Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

You probably cannot claim ownership based upon the concept of adverse possession, because the occupancy of property by one co-owner is not considered adverse except in unusual circumstances, such as when the owner in possession excludes the owner out of possession by force or threat or similar actions clearly indicating an unwillingness to share possession with the co-owner. If you have had little or no contact with the organization that co-owns the property, or your contacts have been generally amicable, your possession is probably insufficiently adverse. However, there is another possibility, which depends upon not only payment of the property taxes, but also payment of the purchase price, property insurance, necessary repairs and the like, and that is the so-called "purchase-money resulting trust." A purchase-money resulting trust arises when an interest in real estate is acquired by X, but with Y's money, and Y did not intend a gift. Purchase-money resulting trusts are misunderstood by many lawyers and, sadly, a fair percentage of judges, so if you feel you can proceed on a purchase-money resulting trust theory in a quiet-title suit against the organization, choose a lawyer who can demonstrate full understanding of the concept (not me, I'm retiring!).