Printable Format60-1002. Quieting or determining title or interest in property. (a) Right of action. An action may be brought by any person claiming title or interest in personal or real property, including oil and gas leases, mineral or royalty interests, against any person who claims an estate or interest therein adverse to him or her, for the purpose of determining such adverse claim.
(b) Action to bar lien claim, when. When a lien on property has ceased to exist, or when an action to enforce a lien is barred by a statute of limitation or otherwise, the owner of the property may maintain an action to quiet title.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-1002; January 1, 1964.
Source or prior law:
(a). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 594; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 618; R.S. 1923, 60-1801; L. 1953, ch. 276, § 4.
(b). L. 1911, ch. 232, §§ 1, 2, 4; R.S. 1923, 60-1802, 60-1803, 60-1805.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Subsection (a); survey of real property and future interests, James K. Logan, 12 K.L.R. 305, 307 (1963).
"Inchoate Dower and the Marketable Title," David K. Fromme, 4 W.L.J. 240, 251 (1965).
Comment on validity of power of sale, Charles R. Wilson, 16 K.L.R. 611, 615 (1968).
Note on mineral lease exemptions from UCC coverage for security purposes, Bryan E. Nelson, 23 K.L.R. 367, 369 (1975).
Survey of property law, Mark Corder and William J. Paprota, 15 W.L.J. 387, 396 (1976).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-1801 to 60-1803 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Judgment in quiet title action in state court res judicata in action in federal court. Neagle v. Brooks, 373 F.2d 40.
2. Effect of defendants' admission against interest considered upon plaintiffs' failure to sustain burden of proof. Beams v. Werth, 200 K. 532, 545, 438 P.2d 957.
3. Applied; action to construe will and quiet title; declaratory judgment as to future interest. Woolums v. Simonsen, 214 K. 722, 727, 522 P.2d 1321.
4. Sale of land impeded by question of extent of title presents judiciable issue; during trial parties agreed on issues. Jensen v. Southwestern States Management Co., 6 K.A.2d 437, 439, 629 P.2d 752 (1981).
5. Cited; where quiet title suit also seeks deed reformation, five-year statute (60-511(5)) applies unless tolled. Ferrell v. Ferrell, 11 K.A.2d 228, 231, 719 P.2d 1 (1986).
6. Whether evidence indicated coownership of property between spouses examined. In re Brollier, 165 B.R. 286, 291 (1994).
7. Whether party established sufficient title or interest in real property to bring quiet title action examined. Dubowy v. Baker, 856 F.Supp. 1491, 1497 (1994).
8. Whether debtor's wife as spouse and co-owner had right of first refusal to purchase property at proposed sale price examined. In re Brollier, 165 B.R. 286, 291 (1994).
9. Trial court committed reversible error by granting summary judgment on quiet title action. LaBarge v. City of Concordia, 23 K.A.2d 8, 20, 927 P.2d 487 (1996).
10. Adverse possessor failed to establish that possession of disputed land was exclusive, thereby preventing claim to quiet title by adverse possession. Crone v. Nuss, 46 K.A.2d 436, 263 P.3d 809 (2011).
11. Owner's eventual desertion of his claim of the half interest in a mineral estate did not deprive him of standing in a quiet title action. Leathers v. Leathers, 856 F.3d 729, 746-49 (10 th Cir. 2017).