I agree with this. But the landowner is afraid of liability if something happens to the old guy while he's working on the cross. I think they should be able to work things out. I wonder why he built this on someone else's property to begin with?password;1222226 wrote:Legally the gentleman has no leg to stand on, but morally, the land owner should just let him continue his routine.
FatHobbit;1222236 wrote:I agree with this. But the landowner is afraid of liability if something happens to the old guy while he's working on the cross. I think they should be able to work things out. I wonder why he built this on someone else's property to begin with?
I'm not 100% sure that's the case.password;1222226 wrote:Legally the gentleman has no leg to stand on,
...If the something happens and the old guy dies on his property, the land owner can just put him under the rocks and nobody would ever know.FatHobbit;1222236 wrote:I agree with this. But the landowner is afraid of liability if something happens to the old guy while he's working on the cross. I think they should be able to work things out. I wonder why he built this on someone else's property to begin with?
I'm with you. After 30 years, sounds like a classic case of adverse possesion.queencitybuckeye;1222270 wrote:I'm not 100% sure that's the case.
Hopefully they can come to some sort of legal liability agreement that the land owner is not responsible if/when the vet falls down the hill.FatHobbit;1222236 wrote:I agree with this. But the landowner is afraid of liability if something happens to the old guy while he's working on the cross.
I don't think that applies in this case. The previous land owner and the current landowner had given permission for him to be on their property, but the old man may be able to claim adverse possesion of the rocks he was taking care of.Devils Advocate;1222280 wrote:I'm with you. After 30 years, sounds like a classic case of adverse possesion.
If not adverse possession, some sort of easement perhaps?password;1222352 wrote:I don't think that applies in this case. The previous land owner and the current landowner had given permission for him to be on their property, but the old man may be able to claim adverse possesion of the rocks he was taking care of.
I am not sure you can take possession of something that you are given permission to use. When ownership of the property changed hands and the old man asked and was given permission to use the property, the clock on possession started over. The granting of an easement would have to be granted by the current owner and it doesn't sound like that will happen, but it would be a good thing if the owner granted a temporary easement to the old man, so he can continue to do his thing while not harming anyone.queencitybuckeye;1222360 wrote:If not adverse possession, some sort of easement perhaps?
Maybe this is why the new landowner doesn't want him there anymore.queencitybuckeye;1222360 wrote:If not adverse possession, some sort of easement perhaps?
