Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Taxes paid on quick claimed property where a portion of a house is involved
The property (4 1/2 acres on the ocean) which has a quick claim on a small portion has a house on it which only about 1/10 of the house is part of this quick claimed property. Is it correct that because the taxes have been paid on this quick claimed piece that we have to give up the house to the quick claimer? What action should we take, if any?
2 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Taxes paid on quick claimed property where a portion of a house is involved
I need more facts. Why is only 1/10th of a house on the
portion which has been quitclaimed? If there is some
mistake, there are remedies. I doubt that the entire house
is lost since 1/10th is on the quitclaimed portion. The
legal action may be quiet title, or a reformation of the quitclaim
deed, or an action as a good faith improver, or perhaps trespass and
ejectment, depending on the facts.
Re: Taxes paid on quick claimed property where a portion of a house is involved
It's hard to tell what your issue is because the facts given don't paint the full picture.
What is this 1/10 interest? Is the property subdivided into two or more parcels, or was there some kind of co-tenancy like tenants in common where one party owned a 10% interest in the entire property?
If the latter, the problem is easier to understand and easier to deal with.
Essentially, two or more persons can own a piece of real estate in percentages. Each co-owner has a right to occupy the entire piece, not just a part representing his fractional interest.
It sounds to me as though at some time in the past an owner quitclaimed a 10% share in the property to someone. Is this correct? Keep in mind that a 'quitclaim' is just a type of deed -- in which the seller says (in effect) to the buyer, "I don't know if I owned it, and I make no guarantees, but if I did own it I sold it to you."
Another possible interpretation of your question is that someone is claiming to own a part of the property through adverse possession. While it is true that paying the property taxes is one factor in determining whether someone has obtained land by adverse possession, it is certainly not the only requirement....the main one is actual possession in hostility to the owner's interest and right.
Another possibility is that the 4.5 acres actually exists in two separate parcels, one of about 0.5 acre and the other of about 4.0 acres, and the house sits on the lot line. However, this seems unlikely to me.
Call, write or e-mail me to discuss, and I'll give you a better answer if I can.