Does section 1007 of the California Code of Civil Procedure apply to preclude an adverse possession claim of the Las Vegas Strip?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Rhodes v. City of Glendora, Corp., B251642 (Cal. App. 2014):

We find no merit to appellant's efforts to demonstrate that section 1007 did not apply to preclude an adverse possession claim of the Strip. At trial, appellant contended that his five-year period required for adverse possession ran from 1961 to 1966, and that therefore the version of section 1007 before its 1968 amendment was applicable. (See Buic v. Buic (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 1600, 1604 [one element of adverse possession is uninterrupted and continuous possession for five years].) He further contended that section 1007 as amended in 1935 permitted public property to be adversely possessed if it was not dedicated for a public use. Building on this contention, appellant first argues that the operative version of section 1007 does not bar his claim because there was no official dedication of the Strip for public use.

Other Questions


In what circumstances will the California Civil Code section 1714 of the Civil Code apply to an individual who has been denied a right to claim damages under the Civil Procedure Act? (California, United States of America)
Does section 394 of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure apply to the California Department of Justice? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 1054(1) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure, section 1054 et. seq. and section 854 of the Criminal Code, allow defense counsel to conduct their investigation and prepare for trial? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for Section 654 of the California Criminal Code when a defendant is found guilty of a breach of section 654 or section 744 of the Code of Civil Procedure? (California, United States of America)
Does section 24 of the California Code of Civil Procedure preclude any breach of contract claims? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant in a civil action be found to have breached section 425.16, subdivision (e) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Act? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 139 of the California Civil Code, section 139 2 of the S.C. Code of Civil Procedure? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant be convicted of violating section 148(a)(1) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure if the jury found a completed violation of section 148 prior to the officers' use of excessive force? (California, United States of America)
In a contract impairment case arising out of section 340.9(1) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Act, is there any case law where the court has found that the provision does not apply to all cases? (California, United States of America)
Does section 140(a) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure apply to those threatening statements that a reasonable listener would understand to constitute a true threat? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.