I was dating a juris dr. awaiting her bar #. Works for a local bankruptcy atty. She looked over a joint tenancy issue for my house and had their law firm send a letter to my ex fiance on the joint tenancy to request her to contact them to resolve taking her off of it. She refused to sign quit claim deed. Now my recent ex lady J.D. is becoming vindictive and threatening to contact my ex fiance to inform her of her rights to seek rent from me since I live in the home and also to inform her to pay me property taxes so that I cannot claim she has abandoned the property for 7 years. After the 7 years with no payment on taxes etc I can seek entire title to house for abandonement under Ga law. Question is if she does inform her, is there legal action I can take against the law firm that my ex J.D. works at since they were representing me and then sent this advice to her. I have a copy of the law firm letter originally sent. Any help is much appreciated. Im not a J.D. but Im being bullied by one. Just a 29 year old college student.
I’m confused.
First you write, "
J D "is threatening to contact by ex fiance (sic) and inform her, etc."
Next, what
"if she (JD) does inform her".
But then it becomes,
“and they sent this advice to her”.
And,
“I have a copy of the law firm letter originally sent.”
_______________________
So which is it? Past, present or future? And what letter, what content, what advice and sent to whom?
Has JD been duplicitous in giving the ex legal advice – revealed professional confidences to your adversary - sent a letter to the ex fiancée OR is she just threatening to do so?
(My goodness! You are a 29-year-old college student and you can’t communicate any clearer than you have here?)
__________________________
In any event JD ain’t as smart as she may purport to be.
Regardless of who is occupying real property held in joint tenancy, short of a binding agreement, one joint tenant cannot legal require the payment of rent by another joint tenant. Period. End of story.
Plus, I would have to see some legal authority that one joint tenant can ouster another under principles of adverse possession without there being an explicit notice of intention to exclusively occupy the property and exclude the non-possessory co-tenant and proof that the latter had had actual or constructive notice of that intent to ouster. All for the required statutory period.
FOR INSTANCE: As in the
Georgia case of
Williams v. Screven Wood Company, Inc., 619 S.E.2d 641 (Ga. 2005), where the court stated the co-tenant claiming adverse possession must show acts inconsistent with, and exclusive of, the rights of the co-tenant not in possession,
and the non-possessory co-tenant must have actual or constructive notice of those acts.
And in the
Board of Trustees of the Tecolote Land Grant v. Griego, 104 P.3d 554 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004), the court held that “explicit notice” of an intent to oust is required.
This licensed attorney who is directly responsible for any work product from his underling JD would do well to stay with practicing bankruptcy law, because he doesn't seem to know much about the law of real property!
