Doc Hayworth said:
"A relative of mine bought a half section from a family several years ago in which one of the brothers was against selling the land and didn't agree to it. Because of adverse possession, after a period of time (three years in that case), that brother could no longer win a lawsuit demanding that the land be returned to him."
I personally do not see where adverse possession has anything to do with this. The land was family owned, it sold and one brother was against the sale. Happens all the time. The land sold, therefore there is no adverse possession, with the land selling in fee.
So if one owner objects to the sale and refuses to sign, he can't come back and gum up the works later (within the proper statute of limitations) because the other co-owners could completely ignore his objections?
I can see that the other property owners could sell their interests in the property to the buyer, but how can they sell the interest of the remaining owner?
Isn't the three year statute of limitations applicable in this case? If the buyer has legal title to the property, what kind of cases are reason for the three year statute of limitations?