ouster

(redirected from Ousters)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Wikipedia.
Related to Ousters: oysters

ouster

Property law the act of dispossessing of freehold property; eviction; ejection
References in periodicals archive ?
As indicated previously, mere possession of a premises by one cotenant does not constitute an actual ouster of fellow cotenants in New York.
Under the common law, the possessing cotenant had a duty to care for the premises and such possession and care did not constitute an actual ouster.
Actual ouster under the common law was generally not a problem since it usually involved a situation where the intent of the possessing cotenant was expressly communicated.
If a cotenant possessed the property, paid all the rents, received all the profits, made all the repairs and acted in all other respects as the true owner, the question would be whether this was "footing" of the bill or whether these acts were of such a character as to constitute an inferred or presumed ouster of fellow cotenants.
The difficulty in determining an inferred ouster is illustrated by the varying circumstances under which courts have allowed adverse possession claims.
In other words, a major shortcoming of the common law was its inability to define, in the absence of ouster, how many years a cotenant had to exclusively possess the property to acquire title adversely.
However, several courts still presumed ouster and granted adverse possession when a cotenant maintained exclusive and continuous possession for a long period of time.
with the acquiescence of the other tenants, an ouster may be
90) In doing so, the Fourth Department accepted the second view that presumed ouster requires more than mere possession for the statutory period.
93) At common law, the clearest form of ouster was an actual ouster whereby the possessing cotenant made an open adverse claim to title.
However, absent actual ouster, the common law failed to define when a court should presume or infer an ouster.
As a result of RPAPL section 541, courts would not have to struggle with presumed or inferred ouster.