Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Off-Topic
Reply to "White’s Ferry"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Rockland getting eviscerated on social. Hopefully they get the message and reverse course. Would be too bad if this was the generation that got greedy and lost the property. [/quote] I don't know if we can call them greedy at this point. Surely they want to be paid fairly, and have expenses of their own.[/quote] The original landowner - A.T.M. Rust - was compensated $17 for the condemned land in 1871 ($367 in 2019 dollars). This was before the plaintiff's heirs bought the land. So the ownership claim remained, but the condemned land could be used for only the purposes of the Ferry. This is really a documentation problem for White's Ferry. There is no authoritative map in the 1871 Condemnation order than pinpoints the condemned land. But the owner of the land at that time clearly knew where the condemned land was located and allowed the ferry depot & road to be built. [b]In short, the plaintiff's are taking advantage of a lack of conclusive documentation to kick the Ferry off the strip of land (despite the fact that the land cannot be used for anything but the Ferry!)[/b][/quote] Yes this. [b]I just don't understand why only the defendant has to prove that the 1871 was the same land they use today. It seems the opposite should be true and the plaintiff should have to find evidence to the contrary. [/b] And why the argument over where the state road ends? I mean who has been paving it for all of these years? I live off a private road. My neighbors and I have to pay for repaving. Why doesn't the state know where it ends. [/quote] Because Virginia law requires the non-owner/trespasser to prove that they are on the right piece of land in which their is an easement/adverse possession. The onus is not on the land owner under VA law.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics