Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol...so it’s okay if the United States becomes feudal Europe? What was the point of your ancestors coming to the Americas? To live under the same system where land is only in the hands of a few people? That’s what they were trying to escape.
100 families with 45 million acres! Lol...whatever. If that sounds good to you, then blehhhhh!
The article explains it quite clearly: "Only the road outside of DF Development’s property is under the Forest Service’s jurisdiction, meaning DF Development has the ability to close off its private property."
So what? The US Constitution doesn't base who has and who doesn't have Constitutional Rights on one's political ideology.
True. But the question is one of easement rights. If the road is the only access to the public lands, an easement of necessity may exist or if the easement has been in existence for 20 years or more an easement by prescription may exist. Idaho's easement laws are explained as "murky." This is headed to court.
US Constitutional Rights, including private property rights. Guaranteed to one and all.
As smart as the Founders were, they didn’t think of EVERYTHING when they wrote the Constitution.
Again, your ancestors ran out of Europe because land ownership was a near impossibility for all but the wealthiest people. That’s what we eventually want here?
US Constitutional Rights, including private property rights. Guaranteed to one and all.
Actually, the constitution says little about private property. Only that you cannot be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process and that the government can not take your property without just compensation, but it can take your property.
True. But the question is one of easement rights. If the road is the only access to the public lands, an easement of necessity may exist or if the easement has been in existence for 20 years or more an easement by prescription may exist. Idaho's easement laws are explained as "murky." This is headed to court.
If there is a legally recorded public use easement on the privately-owned property, that's the end of it. Is there? If there is no such legally recorded easement, due process must be observed and the property owner(s) must be paid just compensation if the attempted taking of their private property for public use is successful.
As smart as the Founders were, they didn’t think of EVERYTHING when they wrote the Constitution.
Again, your ancestors ran out of Europe because land ownership was a near impossibility for all but the wealthiest people. That’s what we eventually want here?
Land ownership in the US is available to any and all. Have at it! The US Constitution guarantees everyone's private property rights.
If there is a legally recorded public use easement on the privately-owned property, that's the end of it. Is there? If there is no such legally recorded easement, due process must be observed and the property owner(s) must be paid just compensation if the attempted taking of their private property for public use is successful.
Not necessarily. There is easement by prescription. This easement works like adverse possession. If I or a group of people have used a road for 20 or more years, we have an easement regardless of whether it is recorded or written, especially if it is our only means of imgress and egress. In this case, this access seems to have been in use for decades.
I have no doubt the Wilkes purchased the property with full knowledge of this road as an access to public lands.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.