Title Opinion

Ok… Jack and the rest of you who belongs to the good old boys club. Try to top this title opinion. It is my private belief that this opinion is applicalbe to all parcels of land in Tamsui:
Don’t buy the God Damned land.

It has been my sorrow and burden to look over several horrible examples of a title-examiner’s nightmare, but this alleged title takes the cutglass flyswatter. It is my private belief that you couldn’t cure the defects if you sued everybody from the Spanish Government (who started this mess) on down to the present possessor of the land, who is in there by virtue of a peculiar instrument optimistically designated by the abstractor as a “General Warranty Deed.”
We might rely on limitation here except that I am reliably informed that nobody has succeeded in living on this land for a longer period than two years, before dying of malnutrition. Laches might help out, but anybody who undertakes to buy land under a title acquired by laches is (to paraphrase Mark Twain) setting out like the man who set out to carry the cat home by the tail – he is going to acquire experience that will be of great value to him and never grow dim or doubtful.
This land has been sold for taxes eight times in the last 40 years. Nobody has ever redeemed one of these tax sales – glad to be rid of it, no doubt. The last purchaser sued the tax collector a month after he bought it for cancellation of the sale for fraud and misrepresentation. He doubtless had grounds, but the incident will give you a rough idea of what kind of muzzle-loading smooth-bores have been fritzing with the title.
The next and most serious defect is a “quit-claim deed containing a general warranty” executed by Ellis Gretzberg (who just appears suddenly out of no where) in the chain of title to one Peter (Prolific) Perkinston.
Unfortunately, Perkinston died, leaving two wives and 17 children, the legitimacy of two of them being severely contested. Fortunately, a shooting match between the two sets of claimants assisted the title slightly by reducing the original number to six and substituting eleven sets of descendants.
It is executed by a fair majority of one set of the offspring of Peter (Prolific) Perkinston, and is acknowledged in a manner sufficient to pass a County Clerk with his fee prepaid. Outside of the fact that it doesn’t exactly describe the property under search, the habendum clause is to the grantors, the covenant of general warranty doesn’t warrant a thing and it is acknowledged before it is dated, I suppose it is all right.
I would advise you to keep the abstracts, if you can. They are a speaking testimonial to the result of notaries public drawing instruments, county clerks who would put a menu on record if a fee was tendered, and jacklegged jugheads posing as lawyers.
You can buy the land if you so desire. There are 573 people who can give you as good a title as your prospective vendor has, not counting the heirs of the illegitimate son of Prather Linkon who died in the penitentiary in 1989 while serving a term for sodomy.

Deadpledge, you took the words right out of my mouth. But you know that the same could be said for Hsintien landlots.

Deadpledge and Sandman, both of you are right. The landownership issue is really messed up in taiwan, especially now there are all kinds of lawsuits being lodged against the ROC government for lands that were called into requisition in the late 40s and early 50s.
hahahaha… that was a funny title opinion. Where did you find title opinion?

hahahahahahahahahahahaha… that’s funny. Prolific, hey??? You are pretty prolific yourself when you were in lawschool. hahahahaha

It’s funny.
So are you ready for the deposition???

It’s been a long time since I last studied Taiwanese land law, but I still distinctively remember that KMT’s version of the Japanese colonial system is worse than its predecessor. I think Taiwan should just adopt the torren system, but good luck try to sell that to the legislative yuan. Although, come to think of it, it may not be as difficult to persuade lifayuan, as long as you are able to find a member to sponsor it. Think about it, the reason why 48 states in the US have not adopted the torrens system is because you real estate lawyers always stick together to lobby against the passage of the bill. And things that Bar Association of Real Estate lawyers would do are just … well you get my picture. But in Taiwan, you don’t have any high power legal interests like the American Real Estate Bar.
Anyway, ok… i am really going to go off the tangents… Torrens or no Torrens… land disputes in Taiwan will always be resolved in the godfather style anyway@@

You must be really out of whack. I thought the Taiwanese land law was a variation of the Torrens system
Hey… I got something funny here i would like to share with y’all. This just came in, and I can neither confirm nor deny the truth of the account:
A Charlotte, NC lawyer purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars then insured them against fire, among other things.
Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars
and without yet having made even his first premium payment on the policy, the
guy filed a claim against the insurance company. In his claim, the guy stated the cigars were lost “in a series of small fires.” The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason: that the man had consumed the cigars
in the normal fashion. The guy sued…and won!
In delivering the ruling the judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous.
The Judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company in which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also
guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be “unacceptable fire” and was obligated to pay the claim. Rather than endure a lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000.00 to the lawyer for his loss of the rare cigars lost in the “fires.”
After the lawyer cashed the check, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON! With his own insurance claim, and testimony from the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and sentenced him to 24 months in jail and a $24,000.00 fine.
Again, I can neither confirm nor deny the truth of the account

According to Snopes, it’s false:

dude!!! y’all checked out other fora on this site? I swear!!! some of them are like Taiwan-bashing sites. I am going to start a boxer rebellion forum here to counteract all the Taiwan-bashing. y’all w/ me on that?

i had it with all of your legal urban legends
You need to take some prozac. Do do anything stupid! Last time you did something stupid it got us all kicked out of the damn forum.

Thanks for the expose.

Besides, you are really off to an inauspicious start. Boxer’s Rebellion??? Last time I check, all the pugilists who participate in the Rebellion were all butchered@@

C is right. Let people speak their mind. Dude, it’s not like you never badmouth taiwan yourself
Hey, I just found out that “Exclusive Report” (or “Scoops Weekly”) owns some land in Monterey Park. If we can get a contingency from shium meifong, perhaps we can lodge a suit in the Southern District. I am not too worry about the jurisdictional defense, because I know for a fact that they conduct enough business here to give me a general jurisdiction. The problem that I am having is with choice of law and forum non conveniens. In put needed. Also the elements for defamation and slander are roughly the same between Taiwan and US right? Is truth an absolute defense under the taiwanese law for public figures?

I seriously hope that you are joking
I personally would have gone for intrusion of privacy and intrusion upon seclusion where falsity is not a requisite element

dude, i don’t see how u can survive an FNC challenge

And where’s my car?

Hi Sandman:
NO… I didn’t know about landlots in Hsintien. The only reason why I know of the condition is Tamsui was because a month ago I was actually going to by a condo there and I went to the municipal office to check the survey…etc. @@ It was just uncanny how the title was clouded left and right and there’s all kinds of zoning violation@@

The rest of you:
behave. esp. liquid cocaine. Please no more legal urban legends on this forum

Speaking of jurisdictional defense, have you guys read this case before?
U. S. ex rel. Mayo v. Satan and his Staff, 54 F.R.D. 282 (W.D.Pa., 1971).
Civil rights action against Satan and his servants who allegedly placed deliberate obstacles in plaintiff’s path and caused his downfall, wherein plaintiff prayed for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The District Court, Weber, J., held that plaintiff would not be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis who in view of questions of personal jurisdiction over defendant, propriety of class action, and plaintiff’s failure to include instructions for directions as to service of process.
Prayer denied.

WEBER, District Judge.
Plaintiff, alleging jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C.

As a former title-examiner for oil and gas ownership (a landman for those who know what that is), I am wondering what the real problem is here.
Can the original poster distill the facts down to a brief?

The original poster was having a schizophrenic conversation with himself. Deadpledge,liquid cocaine,liquidnitrogen, jakjak, CERCLA, Liquid cocaine-not are all the same person. I couldn’t discern a point either. Mind if I close this thread?