Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adverse Possession topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill to bar adverse‑possession claims where owner has been paying taxes; sponsor seeks costs provision
Summary
House Bill 123, aimed at protecting landowners who have been paying property taxes from adverse‑possession claims, passed committee unanimously with a drafting amendment; the sponsor proposed a follow‑up amendment to require adverse‑possession claimants to pay legal costs if they pursue claims that force owners to incur defense costs.
The Agriculture, State & Public Lands & Water Resources Committee unanimously voted 9–0 to pass House Bill 123 with an amendment that inserts the phrase "consistent with the recorded title" after a listed term in the bill.
The sponsor told the committee the bill responds to a practical dispute on a leased ranch where decades of informal fencing and changing leases created uncertainty about legal boundaries. The sponsor said the measure is meant to stop adverse‑possession claims from being used to force property owners who have paid taxes on a described parcel into costly legal defenses.
"My thought was, why even open the door and allow that process to start?" the sponsor said, describing the stress a threatened claim had placed on a long‑time landowner. The sponsor asked the committee to consider additional language that would make an adverse‑possession claimant responsible for legal fees incurred by a landowner if the claimant initiates such an action. He offered draft wording: "if someone starts an adverse possession on someone and causes the land owner to incur costs, the one suing for the adverse possession shall bear all legal costs incurred by the land owner." The sponsor asked to provide refined wording to the secretary and the committee agreed to work with Legislative Service Office (LSO) on placement and drafting.
Supporters included Brett Moline of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation and Jim Maggagno of the Wyoming Stock Association, who testified the circumstances described by the sponsor are common in rural Wyoming and urged statutory clarity. Maggagno recommended adding language that ties the protection to the "recorded title" so assessed records and recorded deeds align.
Committee discussion focused on placement of the costs provision, potential unintended consequences and whether the recorded title or assessor records should govern. Members asked LSO and legal staff to work with the sponsor on a conceptual amendment to address the sponsor's costs proposal so it can be drafted in appropriate statutory language.
On roll call the bill passed 9–0; members directed the sponsor and LSO to produce proposed language for any additional amendment in the committee of the whole if the bill advances.
Why it matters: The bill seeks to reduce legal exposure for landowners who have paid taxes on described property by clarifying that paying taxes and recorded title should limit adverse‑possession claims; the sponsor also proposed making claimants who initiate costly, baseless actions responsible for defense fees.
The sponsor will provide draft language to staff for a possible future amendment.
