- KEY WORDS:
MEMO TO: L. M. Blain
Re: Possession Inquiry Notice
Possession of land is constructive notice to all te wt14d of
whatever rights the occupants have in the land. Whin Lsoession
is opn, visible and exclusive it will put those aituiiyn
any title to or a lien on the land on inquiry to a*0ert.in the
nature of the rights of the occupants. Portland C~meit vs
Roper 67 So. 115 (1914) one who acquires title or an interest
in land with constructive notice of the actual poslessaon and
occupancy of the land by one other than the vendor tak*g subject
to whatever,rights as proper inquiry will disclose.
The nature of the occupant's rights may be shown by any use of
the land that indicates an intention to appropriate it'for
the benefit of the possessor. Such use may be any to which the
land is adapted and is calculated to apprise the Wtld that the
property is occupied by claim of right thereon. (Fla. iJr.Notice
Whatever fairly puts a person on inquiry is sufficient notice
where the means of knowledge are at hand (Recdrd Netice) and
if he omits to inquire, he is then chargeable with all the
facts with which by proper inquiry he might have aeoerikined.
Am. Jur. Section 12.
What constitutes sufficient possession to put one on notice is
a question of fact. In Miller vs Green 58 NW bi7 R 2A4 7;04
wherein 2 acres out of 63 acres had been plowed an4 a pile of
manure had been placed samko A on the land (the plc*d aareage
visible from the highway), it was held that the above facts were
sufficient to put a subsequent purchaser on notice as to the
rights of the possessor.
In George vs Stansburg 111 S. E. 598 held that hauling dirt on to
a vacant lot was sufficient to be constructive notice to a
subsequent purchaser so as to require him to inquire as to the
rights of the party in possession.
July 2, 19 69.
(|)W ^ 7 I