Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I understand a few of the major public universities wound up with copies. I’m pretty sure the Maryland State system has one because I borrowed it a few years ago. If I am remembering it right, I found it rather poorly written.
The Thugs on the Bench disestablished Christianity in the public schools for us. The Thugs on the Bench broke Jim Crow before it was cool to be against segregation. The Thugs on the Bench invented most of the basic civil rights that people today take for granted. Free Speech dates from the aftermath of World War I.
The Right to Counsel and the Protections against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures date to the 1960s. Just read the dates on the major cases. Recognizable Free Speech was invented in the 1920s.
The Thugs on the Bench preserve constitutional government and the rule of law against tyrannical majorities, and have been doing it steadily for some time. I somehow doubt Naysburg would willing abandon those core rights thrust on him by the Thugs on the Bench like Warren or Holmes.
Conversion and Trespass to chattels. They’re terms of art for various level of damaging other people’s property. They probably think it’s their land, so prepare for some ordinary trespass. If they really hate you, they might describe it as misdemeanor theft and call the cops. Could be some vandalism charges. Just because its on your land doesn’t mean you can break it. (Of course, in jurisdictions allow self-help, you can do that. As I’ve said before, check.)
In all likelihood, your damages for trespass are nominal, meaning you’ll recover $1 and an injunction compelling him to stop. You might punitive if they find he acted in bad faith. If you damage the boards on the fence, you will probably cause more than $1 in damages. If, as a consequence of a court might see as your illegal destruction of his wall, he suffers further damages (someone breaks into his work site and steals his tools) you might be on the hook for that. Etc. And it looks bad at trial.
Why give the other side ammunition when you give them a preliminary injunction?
Naysberg, two wrongs don’t make a right. In many jurisdictions, they make a counterclaim.
I wouldn’t advise self help. Self help can land you in court because its complicated. Not every jurisdiction tolerates self-help remedies.
I think most people address encroachments with actions for trespass.
If you “sleep on your rights”, meaning that you kick people off your land, you start to lose the right to kick them off ever. Generally, it’s 20 years to lose title, but much less to lose the right to stop them from using your land. Easements are complicated, but if you do not object punctually, (within five years, usually), they might acquire the permanent right to use your land.
It’s probably not enough to just kick and scream. I think you might need to evict them to keep the land.
Also, if they start improving your land and you do not object, that’s really really bad. If you do not object punctually, they’ll argue you gave them tacit permission which –because it induced foreseeable detrimental reliance– can no longer be withdrawn.
You should probably at least consult an attorney to find out what you have to do to keep from losing the land at civil law. Knowing the civil remedy will probably get you a better negotiated settlement.
Your property line on the deed might not be where your fences are. You should probably check that and see if you are listed as the owner of the disputed land. If you aren’t, you or your previous owner probably adversely possessed it years ago. Once again, you’ll need a lawyer for local laws, etc.