{"id":5704,"date":"2017-09-12T07:40:27","date_gmt":"2017-09-12T07:40:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=5704"},"modified":"2018-12-04T02:47:44","modified_gmt":"2018-12-04T02:47:44","slug":"adverse-possession-many-other-types-of-possession","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/reunitethestates.org\/?page_id=5704","title":{"rendered":"possession – detention or use of a physical thing with intent to hold it as one’s own; asserting dominion"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 This page is continued from Tenancy<\/a>:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

************************<\/p>\n

possession<\/span>:<\/span>
\n<\/strong><\/span>(14c.)<\/span><\/p>\n

1. The fact of having or holding property in one’s power; the exercise of dominion over property.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

2. The right under which one may exercise control over something to the exclusion of all others; the continuing exercise of a claim to the exclusive use of a material object.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

3. <\/strong>Civil law.<\/em> The detention or use of a physical thing with the intent to hold it as one’s own.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

4. (usually plural) Something that a person owns or controls; PROPERTY (2). <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

5. A territorial dominion of a state or country.\u00a0<\/strong>[1]<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Occupancy and exercise of dominion over property. 42 Am J2d Prop\u00a0\u00a7 42<\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The exercise of dominion over land, even without a residence thereon. Morrison v Kelly<\/em>, 22 Ill 610<\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A holding of land legally by one’s self or through another, such as a lessee, under title, estate, or interest of any kind. Whithed v St. Anthony & Dakota Elevator Co<\/em>. 9 ND 224, 83 NW 238<\/span>.\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Respecting real property,\u00a0<\/span>possession<\/span>\u00a0involves exclusive dominion\u00a0and control such as owners of like property usually exercise over it. \u00a0The existence of such possession is largely a question of fact dependent on the nature of the property and the surrounding circumstances. <\/span><\/span>35 Am J2d Fore E & D \u00a7 20<\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

To constitute possession, within the meaning of a reconveyance act requiring a tax title holder, in order to preserve his interest against redemption, to take possession or institute a proceeding to secure possession within the time provided, the land must be appropriated to the individual use in such a manner as to apprise the community that it is in the exclusive use and enjoyment of the person so appropriating it. Pickens v Adams<\/em>, 7 111 2d 283, 131 NE2d 38, 56 ALR2d 605<\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

What amounts to possession and what to mere custody in the law of larceny cannot be determined according to any settled formula, but the question in any particular case must depend largely upon the capacity in which the accused was given access to or dominion over the property taken, and upon the powers or duties which the owner gave or imposed upon him with respect thereto. For example, one to whom property is delivered by the owner for some limited, special, or temporary purpose may be regarded as having its custody only, and as capable of committing larceny thereof. \u00a0Hence, if the owner gives property to another to take to the owner\u2019s house, and such other person wrongfully sells it, he is guilty of larceny, although he conceived the\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>intent and purpose so to dispose of it after he had received it. 32 Am J1st Larc \u00a7 56<\/span>.\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>[2]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

1. Occupancy and dominion over property; a holding of land legally, by one’s self (actual possession) or through another person such as a tenant (constructive possession). \u00a0The holding may be by virtue of having title or an estate or interest of any king. \u00a0one need not have a residence on th eland to be in actual possession of it.<\/strong> [3]<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Excerpt from\u00a0Frederick Pollock & Robert Samuel Wright, An Essay on Possession in the Common Law<\/em><\/a> 1-2 (1888):<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201c[A]s the name of Possession is… one of the most important in our books, so it is one of the most ambiguous. Its legal senses (for they are several) overlap the popular sense, & even the popular sense includes the assumption of matters of fact which are not always easy to verify. In common speech a man is said to possess or to be in possession of anything of which hs has the apparent control, or from the use of which he has the apparent power of excluding others… [A]ny of the usual outward marks of ownership may suffice, in the absence of manifest power in someone else, to denote as having possession the person to whom they attach. Law takes this popular conception as a provisional groundwork, *& builds up on it the ntion of possession in a technical sense, as a definition legal relation to something capable of having an owner, which relation is distinct separable both from real & from apparent ownership, though often concurrent with one or both of them.<\/span>\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>[4]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Excerpt from John Salmond,<\/span> Jurisprudence<\/em><\/a> 285 (Glanville L. Williams ed., 10th ed. 1947):<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u201cIn the whole range of legal theory there is no conception more difficult than that of possession. The Roman lawyers brought their usual acumen to the analysis of it, & since their day the problem has formed the subject of a voluminous literature, while it still continues to tax the engenuity of jurists. Nor is the question oe of the mere curiosity or scientific interest, for its practical importance is not less than its difficulty. The legal consequences which flow from the acquisition & loss of possession are many & serious. Possession, for example, is evidence of ownership; the the possessor of a thing is presumed to be the owner of it, & may put all other claimants to proof of their title.<\/span>\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>[5]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Various Forms of Possession:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

adverse possession<\/span><\/a> – continuous, exclusive, hostile, open, and notorious enjoyment of real property with a claim of right when that enjoyment is opposed to another person’s claim; the doctrine by which title may be obtained by doing so for a specified period of time.<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014aka<\/span> adverse dominion<\/span><\/em>, though not considered an unlawful form of adverse dominion. <\/span><\/strong>Cf. PRESCRIPTION (5).<\/span>
\n<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n