Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Are Private Individuals allowed to own Public Property?

Public entities sell land to private persons all the time. Public land is public land because it is owned by the public, i.e. some government or subdivision thereof. When it is sold to a private person, it ceases to be public land and becomes private land, with an important exception ((public trust land) described below.

Public land, while publicly owned, varies in the degree of public access permitted -- compare, for example, freely-accessible national forests with federal prisons and military installations.

There is also a kind of public interest in land, called the "public trust," which says that certain lands simply cannot be owned in fee simple by private parties. The most common examples are waterfronts and navigable waters, but there are others. Such lands can only be used for a public purpose. Sometimes they are leased or even sold, but the sale (or lease) always contains the public trust restriction on the private interest, which is, therefore, less that a "fee simple absolute" interest. The reserved public interest doesn't have to be in the written document. It arises by the very nature of the lands involved. There has been fierce litigation over what lands are affected, mainly in the 19th Century, but cases still arise.

So, in some cases, land cannot be sold without this restriction. However, only a small part of government-owned land is subject to the public trust doctrine.

I doubt that your parcel is subject to the public trust. More likely, there is a restrictive covenant or zoning ordinance affecting your title. If you obtained a preliminary title report, it may shed some light on the matter.

Your recourse could be against the seller, any broker involved, or the title insurer. Have a real estate lawyer in the county where the land is situated go over your deed, contract of sale, and title report and insurance.

Re: Are Private Individuals allowed to own Public Property?

Typically, the type of restriction you are referring to is probably a covenant, condition or restriction upon the use of the land. A seller is required to disclose all material facts affecting the value of the property. Surely, this should have been disclosed to you. Also, if there was a title report, then, any restrictions running upon the land or easements would also have been discovered. It might be contained in the purchase/escrow documents and you didn't pick it up. You should consult a lawyer to review these documents. Good luck and thanks for inquiring.

Re: Are Private Individuals allowed to own Public Property?

My question is whether or not the seller was required to disclose the use restrictions on the property during the sale. If there was a broker involved, did you ever discuss your intended use of the property? Depending on what happened during the transaction, you may have a claim against one or more of these entities. I would be happy to discuss the matter with you further and give you my thoughts on these issues as well as the private ownership question.