The Letter of the Law: March 2015


Real Estate Law: How to Clear Title to Real Property – The Basics

Construction Law: Reforms to Construction Defect Litigation Signed Into Law in Nevada

Employment Law: A Parent Corporation May Be Liable for the Nonpayment of Wages By its Subsidiary

How to Clear Title to Real Property – The Basics

California law provides a statutory method of resolving conflicting interests in real property, known as an action to “quiet title.” A quiet title action may be brought to establish-or to clear title against -any kind of claimed title or interest in real property. The action is available to anyone who holds an interest or a claimed interest in the property.

Quiet title actions are typically brought to establish or defeat easement claims or to resolve competing claims of legal or equitable ownership. But the remedy is not limited to these more or less straightforward situations. The author of this newsletter recently handled a quiet title case involving disputed rights and obligations arising from the foreclosure of a developer’s ownership interest, water rights and development rights in approximately 1,100 acres of land covered by a complex, multi-party development agreement.

There is no specific statute of limitations for an action to quiet title; the applicable limitation period generally is based on the underlying legal theory of relief. However, an action to quiet title against a known adverse claim must be brought within five years of the first assertion of the adverse claim. Any question regarding a possible statute of limitations issue should be brought to the attention of an attorney at the earliest possible time.

A quiet title judgment generally will be binding as against all persons, known or unknown, provided that the procedural requirements of the quiet title statute have been met. If the action is handled properly, the quiet title judgment should result in a clear and marketable title that can be insured by any title insurance company.

A quiet title action must be distinguished from an action to remove a “cloud” on title created by the existence and/or recordation of a particular legal instrument. The proper form of action in that type of case typically will be an action for cancellation or “reformation” of the instrument.

A Parent Corporation May Be Liable for the Nonpayment of Wages By its Subsidiary


Jon J. Carlston Joins the Las Vegas, Nevada Office

Kring & Chung would like to welcome Jon Carlston to the Las Vegas, Nevada office. His litigation-based practice focuses in the areas of commercial, property, landlord/tenant, personal injury, and family law disputes. Mr. Carlston began his law career as a judicial law clerk for a number of Clark County, Nevada, judges before moving on to private practice. Mr. Carlston handles all facets of case management and litigation, including mediation, arbitration, trial, and appeal. He is accomplished at litigating a wide variety of cases for both businesses and individuals.

2015 Global Awards Recipient

Corporate LiveWire has selected Kring & Chung, LLP as a 2015 Global Awards recipient in the area of Labor and Employment. The Global Award recognizes businesses that display excellent standards and incredible performance across the globe. Corporate LiveWire’s team of journalists work to provide business professionals and individuals in the corporate and business community with information on the latest news and developments around the world.

Score Seminar – Common Legal Questions for Start-up Businesses