Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
1
in property law
An assertion of ownership or title to land supporting the hostility element required for adverse possession. The possessor acts as if the land belongs to them, often under a good-faith mistaken belief about boundaries, allowing tacking of successive periods and seasonal use consistent with the property's nature to satisfy the statutory period.
Sense 1
1
in property law
An assertion of ownership or title to land supporting the hostility element required for adverse possession. The possessor acts as if the land belongs to them, often under a good-faith mistaken belief about boundaries, allowing tacking of successive periods and seasonal use consistent with the property's nature to satisfy the statutory period.
Sources & Authorities· 1 primary source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Sense 2
2
in criminal law
An honest belief by a defendant that they are entitled to property or services that negates the specific intent required for theft offenses such as larceny or embezzlement. The defense applies even if the belief is unreasonable, provided it is held in good faith, and open retention of the property tends to support its existence.
Sources & Authorities· 2 primary sources
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
An honest belief by a defendant that they are entitled to property or services that negates the specific intent required for theft offenses such as larceny or embezzlement. The defense applies even if the belief is unreasonable, provided it is held in good faith, and open retention of the property tends to support its existence.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Examples1
Boundary Mistake Allows Tacking
Carlos Castillo and his predecessors farmed a narrow strip along their property line for decades under the mistaken belief created by an old survey stake that the strip belonged to them. They planted crops, grazed cattle, and built a shed on the strip without permission from the true owner. Because the use occurred under a good-faith claim of right, the periods of possession by successive owners can be tacked to satisfy the statutory period for adverse possession.
Frequently Asked1
Does a claim of right in adverse possession require the possessor to know the land belongs to someone else?+
No. The possessor may act under a good-faith mistaken belief that the land is their own, such as due to a boundary error, and still satisfy the hostility element through a claim of right.
Supporting sources
Common Law
Examples5
Urgent Reentry Without Claim of Right
Claire Campbell returns to her former apartment after being unlawfully locked out and uses minimal force to enter when she believes the landlord has no claim of right to retain possession. The circumstances appear urgent enough that waiting for a court order would cause exceptional hardship. Her honest belief that the landlord lacks any claim of right supports justification for the entry under self-help rules.
Resisting Possessor's Claim of Right
Cade Carpenter attempts to resist a property manager who is using force to protect a storage closet containing disputed items. Carpenter knows the manager is acting under a claim of right to the property as the current possessor. Because the manager's force is used under that claim of right, Carpenter cannot justify his own resistance as self-defense.
Duty to Surrender to Claim of Right
Cassandra Cooper faces an agitated person demanding return of a console she is holding. She knows she can avoid any confrontation with complete safety by placing the console on the floor and retreating. Because the demand comes from someone asserting a claim of right, she must surrender the item rather than use deadly force.
Implicit Police Claim of Right
Caitlin Crowley is a passenger in a vehicle pulled over by an officer who acts with an implicit claim of right based on suspected faulty driving. The stop diverts both driver and passenger from the flow of traffic and subjects the passenger to scrutiny. The officer's claim of right to conduct the stop means the passenger is seized for Fourth Amendment purposes along with the driver.
Brendlin v. California551 U.S. 249 (2007)
Assertion of Federal Constitutional Right
Colin Chambers raises claims of federal right in a state condemnation proceeding by arguing that the taking of property without just compensation violates the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court overrules the motion asserting these claims, necessarily deciding them adversely. The claims of federal right are preserved for Supreme Court review because they were distinctly asserted below.
Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago166 U.S. 226, 239, 17 S.Ct. 581, 585, 41 L.Ed. 979 (1897)
Frequently Asked3
Can an unreasonable belief still support a claim-of-right defense to theft?+
Yes. The defense requires only an honest belief in the right to the property, even if the belief is unreasonable or mistaken.
Supporting sources
How does a claim of right affect the duty to retreat in self-defense under the Model Penal Code?+
A person who knows they can avoid deadly force with complete safety by surrendering property to someone asserting a claim of right must do so rather than use deadly force.
Supporting sources
Does open retention of property support a claim-of-right defense in embezzlement?+
Yes. Open and undisguised retention tends to show the defendant acted under a bona fide claim of right that negates fraudulent intent.
Supporting sources
342 U.S. 246, 72 S.Ct. 240, 96 L.Ed. 288.Criminal Law
…“1. For the purposes of this Act— “(1) A person steals who, without the consent of the owner, fraudulently and without a claim of right made in good faith, takes and carries away anything capable of being stolen with intent, at the time of such taking, permanently to deprive the owner thereof: “Provided that a person…