DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Auction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Auction Public auction From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about an auction on behalf of a government. For auctions open to the public, see Auction. A public auction is an auction held on behalf of a government in which the property to be auctioned is either property owned by the government, or property which is sold under the authority of a court of law or a government agency with similar authority. [edit]Sale of property owned by the government Government property sold at public auction may include surplus government equipment, abandoned property over which the government has asserted ownership, property which has passed to the government by escheat, government land, and intangible assets over which the government asserts authority, such as broadcast frequencies sold through a spectrum auction. Public auctions of government property may be conducted by whichever agency is auctioning the property. Some substantial items have been sold at public auction. For example, the United States Navy cruiser USS Philadelphia (C-4) was sold at such an auction at the Puget Sound Navy Yard in 1927. [edit]Sale of private property in a public auction Private property may be sold in a public auction for a number of reasons. It may be seized through a governmental process to satisfy a judgment rendered by a court or agency, or to liquidate amortgage foreclosure, tax lien, or tax sale. Usually, prices obtained at a public auction to satisfy a judgment are distressed - that is, they are much lower than the price which would be obtained for that property if the seller were free to hold out for an optimal time to sell. In the United States, public auctions to satisfy judgments are usually conducted under the authority of the sheriff of the county or city in which the property to be auctioned was seized pursuant to the judgment, and an auction held for such a purpose is also called a Sheriff's sale. Real property may be subject to a public auction in order to partition the property between joint tenants who can not agree as to how the property should be divided. An estate sale conducted at the direction of a probate court may also be conducted as a public auction. For a directory of sheriff sales and auctions, visit sheriffsalesnet.com. [edit] An auction is a process of buying and selling goods or services by offering them up for bid, taking bids, and then selling the item to the highest bidder. In economic theory, an auction may refer to any mechanism or set of trading rules for exchange. There are several variations on the basic auction form, including time limits, minimum or maximum limits on bid prices, and special rules for determining the winning bidder(s) and sale price(s). Participants in an auction may or may not know the identities or actions of other participants. Depending on the auction, bidders may participate in person or remotely through a variety of means, including telephone and the internet. The seller usually pays acommission to the auctioneer or auction company based on a percentage of the final sale price. Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Abandoned property) Property law Part of the common law series Acquisition Gift · Adverse possession · Deed Conquest · Discovery · Accession Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property Treasure trove · Bailment · License Alienation Estates in land Allodial title · Fee simple · Fee tail Life estate · Defeasible estate Future interest · Concurrent estate Leasehold estate · Condominiums Conveyancing Bona fide purchaser Torrens title · Strata title Estoppel by deed · Quitclaim deed Mortgage · Equitable conversion Action to quiet title · Escheat Future use control Restraint on alienation Rule against perpetuities Rule in Shelley's Case Doctrine of worthier title Nonpossessory interest Easement · Profit Covenant Equitable servitude Related topics Fixtures · Waste · Partition Riparian water rights Prior-appropriation water rights Lateral and subjacent support Assignment · Nemo dat Property and conflict of laws Other common law areas Contract law · Tort law Wills, trusts and estates Criminal law · Evidence v · d · e Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property are categories of the common law of property which deals with personal property which has left the possession of its rightful owner without having directly entered the possession of another person. Property can be considered lost, mislaid or abandoned depending on the circumstances under which it is found by the next party who obtains its possession. The rights of a finder of such property are determined in part by the status in which it is found. Because these classifications have developed under the ancient and often archaic common law of England, they turn on nuanced distinctions. The general rule attaching to the three types of property may be summarized as: A finder of property acquires no rights in mislaid property, is entitled to possession of lost property against everyone except the true [1] [2] owner, and is entitled to keep abandoned property. This rule varies by jurisdiction. Contents [hide] 1 Lost property 2 Mislaid property 3 Treasure trove 4 Abandoned property 5 Recent developments 6 See also 7 References 8 External links [edit]Lost property Property is generally deemed to have been lost if it is found in a place where the true owner likely did not intend to set it down, and where it is not likely to be found by the true owner. At common law, the finder of a lost item could claim the right to possess the item against any person except the true owner or any previous possessors.[3][4] The underlying policy goals to these distinctions are to (hopefully) see that the property is returned to its true original owner, or "title owner." Most jurisdictions have now enacted statutes requiring that the finder of lost property turn it in to the proper authorities; if the true owner does not arrive to claim the property within a certain period of time, the property is returned to the finder as his own, or is disposed of.[5] In Britain, many public businesses have a lost property desk, which in the United States would be called a lost and found. Many exceptions may be applied at common law to the rule that the first finder of lost property has a superior claim of right over any other person except the previous owner. For example, a trespasser's claim to lost property which he finds while trespassing is generally inferior to the claim of the respective landowner. As a corollary to this exception, a landowner has superior claim over a find made within the non-public areas of his property, so if a customer finds lost property in the public area of a store, the customer has superior claim to the lost property over that of the store-owner, but if the customer finds the lost property in the non-public area of that store, such as an area marked "Employees Only," the store-owner will have superior claim, as the customer was trespassing when he found it.[6] The status of finders as employees or tenants of the landowner complicates matters, because employees and tenants have legitimate access to non-public areas of a landowner's property that others would not, without trespassing. Employees and tenants, however, still usually lose superior claim over lost property to their employers or landlords if the property is found within the scope of their employment, or outside the actual leased area, respectively.[7] For example, if the lost property is found by a tenant inside the walls of his leasehold, or by an employee embedded within the soil of an estate owned by his employer, the landowner (as employer or landlord) of the property where it was found usually has a superior claim of right over that of the finder. However, this is not always the case, as a long-term tenant who finds lost property within the leased area of his leasehold may have a superior claim over that of his landlord (especially if the landlord has never been to the property). While employers usually have a superior claim over lost property found by their employees, exceptions to this exist as well, as modern law sometimes grants the employee superior claim if turning over lost property to his employer is not part of his job description (such as if the employee is an interior decorator).[8] Unclaimed Property laws in the United States provide for two reporting periods each year whereby unclaimed bank accounts, stocks, insurance proceeds, utility deposits, un-cashed checks and other forms of "personal property" are reported first to the individual state Unclaimed Property Office, then published in a local newspaper and then finally the property is turned over to the State for safe keeping until its rightful owner makes a claim. The states sponsor a free public site that reports a only a portion of the unclaimed property available in the United States. There are commercial sites as well that provide the same information or portions of the information for a fee. Some consumer reporting sites that conduct the research and assist consumers without charge or expense to the consumers. [edit]Mislaid property Property is generally deemed to have been mislaid or misplaced if it is found in a place where the true owner likely did intend to set it, but then simply forgot to pick it up again. For example, a wallet found in a shop lying on a counter near a cash register will likely be deemed misplaced rather than lost. Under common law principles, the finder of a misplaced object has a duty to turn it over to the owner of the premises, on the theory that the true owner is likely to return to that location to search for his misplaced item.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Launch of "Strata Title Property Rights– Private Governance of Multi
    Launch of “Strata Title Property Rights – Private governance of multi-owned properties” by Cathy Sherry University of New South Wales 2 August 2017 Mark Leeming1 Everyone is interested in architecture. Perhaps the best illustration of this is the runaway success of Kevin McCloud’s “Grand Designs” televison shows. Putting to one side the allure of McCloud himself, that success is in part a testament to the basic urge to build one’s own home, something which is never going to happen for the overwhelming majority of Australians. And even for those who merely end up owning their own home, increasingly that home will be a lot within a strata scheme or community title. There have been more than 1 million people living in Sydney in such schemes since 2011, and both the number and the proportion are only going to increase. Walking to this launch from the closest railway station this evening well illustrates the phenomenon. I passed a very rare single storey sandstone 19th century terrace a couple of minutes from Green Square, next to rows of late Victorian and early twentieth century two storey terraces. But then there were blocks of modern high density towers, before, after passing under Southern Cross Drive, one sees examples of the very worst of the 1960s and 70s three storey walk-ups, products of the legislation the subject of this book. One of the things which the photographs in this delightful book (yes, photographs in a law book!) convey is the changing architecture of flats and apartments, connected with legislative changes. There is, in the case of planning law and laws governing communal living, a very close link between the legislative regime and the lived-in character of the urban environment.
    [Show full text]
  • THE Definitive PRIME RESIDENTIAL Briefing THE
    A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON PRIME RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND WEALTH THE DEfINITIVE PRIME RESIDENTIAL BRIEfING new HIGH fOR CONTEMPORARY ART THE WORLD’S MOST INfLuENTIAL CITIES ASIA PACIfIC PRIME REAL ESTATE OuTLOOk fOCuS ON PROPERTY MARkET INVESTMENT WHERE THE WEALTHY ARE INVESTING KNIGHT FRANK TERMS AND DEFINITIONS HNWI is an acronym for 'high-net-worth individual’, a person whose investible assets, excluding their principal residence, total between $1m and $10m. An UHNWI (ultra-high-net-worth individual) is a person whose investible assets, excluding their primary residence, are valued at between $10m and $100m-plus. The term ‘prime property’ equates to the most desirable, and normally most expensive, property in a defined location. Commonly, but not exclusively, prime property markets are areas where demand has a significant international bias. Exchange rates: unless otherwise stated these were calculated using the rate on Feb 1 2010. The Wealth Report 2010 Attitudes Survey: the participants of the survey comprised clients of Citi Private Bank. Survey conducted between 1 December 2009 and 31 January 2010. CONTRIBUTORS Prime, prestige, luxury – all labels applied to the top end of the residential property Written and edited by Andrew Shirley and Liam Bailey, Knight Frank LLP. For research and press enquiries: Liam Bailey, Knight Frank LLP, market in different parts of the world. 55 Baker Street, London W1U 8AN +44 (0)20 7861 5133 ANDREW SHIRLEY Andrew, when not editing While the names may differ, the desire of High¯Net¯Worth Individuals to own The Wealth Report 2010, is head of and invest in the best property is ubiquitous around the globe.
    [Show full text]
  • Extension of the Torrens System Into Hawaii, the Philippine Islands and Latin-American Jurisdictions R.G
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 1952 Extension of the Torrens System into Hawaii, the Philippine Islands and Latin-American Jurisdictions R.G. Patton Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Patton, R.G., "Extension of the Torrens System into Hawaii, the Philippine Islands and Latin-American Jurisdictions" (1952). Minnesota Law Review. 2108. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/2108 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXTENSION OF THE TORRENS SYSTEM INTO HAWAII, THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS AND LATIN-AMERICAN JURISDICTIONS* By R. G. PATTON** N PRIMITIVE society ownership was always predicated upon possession and to a very large extent that is the case in the most advanced civilizations. If you purchase an article of clothing or jewelry, you and the retailer from whom you make your purchase probably merely exchange two items of property, you giving him a sum of money and he giving you the article purchased. Neither of you inquire into the title of the other and, except in the case of stolen property, the title is unassailable. Practically the same system prevailed in England in respect to land at the time of the settlement of the American colonies, and to a large extent, since then. Since a tract of land was not of such character that it could be picked up by the vendor and handed to his purchaser he did the next best thing by handing to the latter a symbol of the land, such as a twig or a clod of earth, with appropriate words showing his purpose in doing so.
    [Show full text]
  • Torrens Title in North Carolina - Maybe a Hundred Years Is Long Enough John V
    Campbell Law Review Volume 39 Article 3 Issue 2 Spring 2017 2017 Torrens Title in North Carolina - Maybe a Hundred Years Is Long Enough John V. Orth Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.campbell.edu/clr Recommended Citation John V. Orth, Torrens Title in North Carolina - Maybe a Hundred Years Is Long Enough, 39 Campbell L. Rev. 271 (2017). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Campbell Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Repository @ Campbell University School of Law. Orth: Torrens Title in North Carolina - Maybe a Hundred Years Is Long E Torrens Title in North Carolina-Maybe a Hundred Years Is Long Enough JOHN V. ORTH* For over a century, North Carolina property owners have been offered an alternative to the traditionaldeed and recordingsystem. Title to land may instead be entered in the Torrens system of registered titles. Under the Torrens system, the court determines the state of the title and issues a certificate, which is held in the registry with a copy given to the registered owner. The certificate provides conclusive evidence of ownership and of any liens or encumbrances on the property. Unlike titles evidenced by deeds, Torrens titles are not subject to loss by adverse possession, and transfer of a Torrens title is a simple process of changing the certificate in the registry and issuing a new certificate. A darling of Progressive law reformers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, nineteen states eventually adopted the Torrens system, although many later had second thoughts and abandonedthe system.
    [Show full text]
  • Four Property Wrongs of Self Storage
    FOUR PROPERTY WRONGS OF SELF-STORAGE LAW Jeffrey Douglas Jones Table of Contents Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question I. The Wild, Wild Lease: Self-Storage Agreements and Default Practices A. Owner’s Liens B. Lien Attachment and Risk of Loss C. From Default to Lien Enforcement D. Lien Enforcement Transferring Title to Landlord E. Lien Enforcement by Public Auction II. The Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law A. The “Crap” Rule B. Tort Law Misfires and the Elimination of Bailments C. Ignored Parallels to Residential Landlord-Tenant Reform D. Treasure Trove and Self-Storage Treasure Hunters III. Conclusion: Legal Reform, Voluntariness, and the Property Ethic “Own Less” Jeffrey Douglas Jones, Associate Professor of Law, Lewis & Clark Law School; J.D., The University of Michigan Law School-Ann Arbor; Ph.D. Philosophy, The University of Wisconsin-Madison. [Thanks] 1 Jones / Four Property Wrongs of Self-Storage Law Introduction: Setting Aside the Constitutional Question Self-storage leases are troubling. Under such leases, self-storage facility owners may freely dispose of defaulting tenants’ medical and tax records, family ashes, heirlooms, etc. in the same manner as they would treat fungible items such as chairs or a bookshelf. Facility owners are legally entitled to do so through facility-sponsored auctions, most of which are unrestricted by any duty to conduct commercially reasonable sales. Still worse, these legal self- storage practices have generated a clandestine culture of treasure-hunting that often leaves tenants—some of whom default due to medical emergencies, bankruptcy or who are homeless working poor—with little opportunity either to regain good standing or obtain fair market value for their belongings.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Law Property - the Law of Treasure and Lost Things Gerald L
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 20 | Number 4 June 1960 Civil Law Property - The Law of Treasure and Lost Things Gerald L. Walter Jr. Repository Citation Gerald L. Walter Jr., Civil Law Property - The Law of Treasure and Lost Things, 20 La. L. Rev. (1960) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol20/iss4/9 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Notes CIVIL LAW PROPERTY-THE LAW OF TREASURE AND LOST THINGS Upon the death of the decedent her heirs were placed in pos- session of her estate. In disposing of the estate the heirs,sid decedent's mattress to the vendee-claimants for two dollars, and fifty cents. The mattress was delivered to a mattress factory for renovation. In the process of renovation the cotton contents, when subjected to a blast of air, yielded several thousand dollars in gold certificates. The mattress company made no claim, for the certificates. The United States brought an interpleader, 1 claiming the certificates but agreeing to pay the rightful owner their face value. The vendees claimed ownership of the certifi- cates by virtue of Article 34232 of the Louisiana Civil Code, con- tending that the certificates were treasure and that therefore ownership vested in them as finders. 3 The heirs, in asserting their right to the certificates, relied on Article 3422, 4 contending that the certificates were lost property and as such should be returned to them.
    [Show full text]
  • Usufruct Study Guide
    Article 562 ± 578 1. Define usufruct. Usufruct is a real right by virtue of which a person is given the right to enjoy the property of another with the obligation of preserving its form and substance, unless the title constituting it or the law provides otherwise. 2. What are the three fundamental Rights Appertaining to Ownership? Ownership consists of three fundamental rights, to wit: - jus disponende (right to dispose) - jus utendi (right to use) - jus fruendi (right to the fruits) 3. Of the above-mentioned fundamental rights, what consists usufruct and naked ownership? The combination of the jus utendi and jus fruendi is called usufruct. The remaining right jus disponendi is really the essence of what is termed ³naked ownership´. 4. What right is transferred to the usufructuary and what right is remained with the owner? In a usufruct, only the jus utendi and jus fruendi over the property is transferred to the usufructuary. The owner of the property maintains the jus disponendi or the power to alienate, encumber, transform, and even destroy the same. (Hemedes vs. CA, 316 SCRA 347 1999). 5. What are the formulae with respect to full ownership, usufruct, and naked ownership? The following are the formulae: - Full Ownership equals Naked Ownership plus Usufruct - Naked Ownership equals Full Ownership minus Usufruct - Usufruct equals Full Ownership minus Naked Ownership 6. What are the characteristics or elements of usufruct? The following are the characteristics or elements of usufruct: ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS: those without which it can not be termed usufruct: (a) It is REAL RIGHT (whether registered in the Registry of Property or not).
    [Show full text]
  • Filing a Homestead Declaration with the County Recorder in Your County
    Informational FILING A HOMESTEAD Brochure DECLARATION If you own a home, you should consider filing a homestead declaration with the County Recorder in your county. A homestead declaration protects your home from being seized and sold in the event that a money judgment is entered against you by a court. What kind of properties may be declared as a homestead? These types of property may be homesteaded: Land with a dwelling house on it plus appurtenances (fixtures and buildings). A mobile home, whether or not the mobile homeowner owns the land on which it sits. A condominium unit. Who can decide to declare a homestead? A single person or, in the case of a married couple, either or both spouses. If someone obtains a money judgment from a court against me, how will a homestead declaration protect my home? For most judgments against you, a homestead declaration protects the first $605,000 of equity you have in your home. If you have less than $605,000 equity in your home and the judgment is not of the type listed below, your home will not be sold to satisfy a judgment. If your equity exceeds $605,000, the property (or a portion of it, if a court determines it can be divided) may be sold, but you are entitled to keep the first $605,000. If allodial title has been established, the exemption extends to all equity in the land, dwelling and appurtenances. A homestead declaration will not prevent your home from being sold to pay a judgment for: Taxes. A mortgage, trust deed or other loan arrangement used to purchase or refinance your property or improvements to your property.
    [Show full text]
  • As a Texian National You Will Be Identified with a Sovereign Entity (Herein After), the Republic of Texas
    1. IDENTIFICATION – As a Texian National you will be identified with a sovereign entity (herein after), the Republic of Texas. A Texian National will not be a Citizen of the State of Texas, a United States Citizen or an American Citizen. Just as one born or naturalized in Norway would be a Norwegian National, one born or naturalized in the Republic of Texas will be a National of the sovereign Texas Republic. Texian Nationals will not be subjects of any other government. 2. TAXATION – As a Texian National you will not be subject to comply with any tax of the State of Texas or parts of the States of Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming, or the United States. Texian Nationals will not be required to pay enforcers Federal Income Tax, Social Security, or FICA. IRS, Federal taxes including those limited to basics such as national defense, highway, police or courts. The people’s Government will operate only from importexport fees and Chartered Corporate fees. 3. LAND OWNERSHIP – As a Texian National you will have the ability to reclaim the land that you live on through a land patent and the possibility of owning your land outright (allodial title) exists. 4. ENERGY – As a Texian National you will be free to use and develop any energy system technologically available. Texian Nationals will be free to pursue and use renewable and free energy options. 5. MEDICINE – As a Texian National you will be free to pursue any remedy available to cure or relieve symptoms related to your body. Vaccines will not be forced upon Texian Nationals.
    [Show full text]
  • The Doctrine of Tenure in Australia Post-Mabo: Replacing the 'Feudal Fiction'
    The doctrine of tenure in Australia post-Mabo: Replacing the ‘feudal fiction’ with the ‘mere radical title fiction’ — Part 2 Dr Ulla Secher* Until the decision of the High Court in Mabo, the universal acceptance and application of the English doctrine of tenure in Australia led to the view that all titles, rights and interests in land had to be the direct consequence of some grant of the Crown. In Mabo, however, six justices of the High Court agreed that the common law, as it had been previously understood, should be changed to recognise native title rights to land; rights which do not derive from a Crown grant. The common law device adopted by the High Court to effect this change, and thereby reconcile the doctrine of tenure and native title when the Crown acquired sovereignty of Australia, was ‘radical title’. This two-part article examines how the Mabo High Court redefined the English doctrine of tenure, or, more accurately, defined the Australian doctrine of tenure, by developing the concept of radical title. It will be seen that in order to achieve this redefinition, the court had to clarify two interrelated aspects of the common law: the applicability of the English (feudal) doctrine of tenure in Australia and the legal effect of the classification of Australia as settled. Part 1 lays the foundation for this analysis by examining the genesis of the doctrine of tenure in pre-Conquest England and the pre-Mabo effect of the colonisation of Australia and the reception of English land. The question posed in Part 2 is twofold: first, how and why the Australian doctrine of tenure, with radical title as its postulate, diverges from the doctrine of tenure in English land law.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Residential Condominium Valuations
    Professional Excellence Bulletin [PP-16-E] September 1995 Revised January 2007 Non-Residential Condominium Valuations In a number of marketplaces across the country, condominium – or strata title (the terms are synonymous) subdivided developments are becoming commonplace. These projects are marketed on the basis that businesses can own the space within which they operate, as well as to individual investors on the basis that this ownership interest can be acquired in commercial or industrial properties at price levels below those possible in conventionally subdivided free- standing investment properties. One also sees bareland strata subdivisions develop from time to time, wherein individual lot owners acquire an interest in common property, like an improvement, lying outside their lot boundaries. Bareland strata provides a fee simple ownership mechanism, yet offers substantial advantages over the alternative non-fee simple mechanisms to retain control of these offsite improvements, such as cooperative or corporate share arrangements. Much as on-going exposure to residential condominium properties has led to a significant body of knowledge within the appraisal community for the valuation of these assets, the passage of time has brought about a greater awareness of the pitfalls inherent in non-residential strata properties, some of which entail potential litigation risk for appraisers. Strata title commercial/industrial properties offer the advantages of ownership in smaller properties than could be achieved for stand-alone buildings; maybe the only way to secure tenure in a specific location, and offer reduced management burden for such things as building and grounds maintenance. However, individual unit owners have less control over both day-to-day operations, and eventual re-development.
    [Show full text]
  • Guarantees of Title
    Guarantees of Title Ownership of land consists of: 1. A good written title with the right of possession. 2. Possession with the right to acquire written title as a result of a lawful, unwritten conveyance. Because most laymen are incapable of determining when written title defects exist or when others have lawful title rights arising from possession, a need has arisen for experts willing to guarantee titles to be free of defects. The professional surveyor certifies to land location and status of encroachments; he does not issue a policy of location guarantee, but he is liable for failure to exercise due care. Title companies, attorneys, courts, or the state (Torrens titles), depending on the jurisdiction, guarantee written title adequacy, and, sometimes on request, they will guarantee location. How titles are guaranteed and who guarantees written titles are the subjects discussed in this Handout. Such discussion cannot be complete without mention of possession guarantee, since lawful occupancy can defeat paper title. A deed to land is never proof of ownership; it is evidence of ownership. Others may have rights against the land because of taxes, liens, mortgages, easements, judgments, bonds, improvement assessments, restrictions on zoning, and many other items. Because of the numerous hazards, new landowners demand ownership guarantee or at least a statement of ownership condition, along with a guarantee that no rights exist other than those stipulated. Exposures to written title defects are not visible and cannot be seen; the purchaser can see exposure to possession defects. The demand for title guarantee has been greater than the demand for possession guarantee.
    [Show full text]