Public agencies hold a significant amount of real property — dedicated parkland, donated parcels, former redevelopment sites, properties acquired through intergovernmental transfers decades ago. The title histories on those properties are often complicated, and title defects don’t appear on a convenient schedule. They surface when the agency is trying to finance a project, close a disposition under the Surplus Land Act, or bring in a private development partner. At that point, a cloud on title isn’t an abstract legal problem, it can delay or stymie a project.
Quiet title is the primary statutory tool for resolving competing claims to real property and establishing clear ownership. Governed by the California Code of Civil Procedure, a quiet title judgment binds all named defendants, and, when proper notice procedures are followed, claimants unknown to the agency as well. Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger attorneys Caitlin Brown, Andrew Schwartz and Matt Zinn have significant quiet title experience. In this article, they offer practical guidance on when agencies need quiet title, what to expect from the process, and where things can go wrong.
When Quiet Title Becomes Necessary
There are many reasons why a public agency may need to quiet title to property it holds. These are just a few examples:
Financing. The most common driver is financing. No lender, bond purchaser, or equity partner will commit funds to a project if title isn’t clean. That makes quiet title not a last resort but often a prerequisite to allow the project to move forward at all.
Heir and claimant disputes on older acquisitions. When agencies acquire property that has been in a family for generations, undisclosed heir claims can surface late.
Scope-of-easement disputes. An easement is a right to use someone else’s property for a specific purpose, but many decades-old easements include just a general right for “access” or “utilities,” sometimes not even attaching a legal description of the easement area. Rather than quieting title to the existence of such easements, the most common issue is what is allowed under the easement. A quiet title action can be used to determine the precise scope of an access or use right.
Old deeds of trust. When a loan secured by real property is paid off, the lender is supposed to record a reconveyance removing the lien from title. Sometimes that doesn’t happen, for example if the lender has dissolved, the beneficiary can’t be located, or the paperwork simply was never completed. A title company won’t insure over an open lien it can’t confirm is satisfied. Naming the trustee and beneficiary in a quiet title action and serving them through publication is often the only way to clear it.
Prescriptive easement and implied dedication claims. These cases tend to be factually intensive and can require a jury trial, adding expense and complexity to resolving disputes and clearing title.
Before You File: Consider the Alternatives
Quiet title litigation is expensive and slow. If there is any other path to resolution through a quitclaim deed (a deed that releases whatever interest the grantor holds, without warranty), a curative instrument, or title insurance, take it. Most title defects don’t require going to court.
Litigation becomes unavoidable when the claimant is unknown or unreachable, the title insurer won’t insure over the defect, or the financing requires a clean judgment, not just a policy with carve-outs or insurance. It’s also worth noting that settling a quiet title action once it is filed is common. The resolution takes the form of a judgment recorded in official records of the county where the property sits, establishing who holds what interest, which gives the same chain-of-title clarity as a litigated outcome.
How the Process Works
A quiet title action begins with a verified complaint (sworn by the plaintiff, who in this case is the public agency itself) that describes the property, identifies the nature of the plaintiff’s title, identifies the adverse claims being challenged, and asks the court for a determination of title.
Immediately upon filing, the agency must record a lis pendens, a notice recorded against the property in the county recorder’s office where the property is located that puts the world on notice that title to the property is in litigation. This process protects the judgment’s effect against third parties who might otherwise acquire an interest in the property during the lawsuit.
After obtaining leave from the court, unknown and unlocatable defendants may be served by publication: The summons is published once a week for four consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation, and the property is posted with notice. This is the procedure that makes the judgment on parties to the action and non-parties whose claims were not of record at the time the lis pendens was filed, not just the parties personally served. However, the judgment does not affect claims of non-parties that were of record when the lis pendens was filed or that were otherwise known or apparent to the plaintiff.
This is a lengthy process, even when no defendants answer the complaint. Unlike ordinary civil litigation, the court cannot enter a default judgment in a quiet title action. Instead, the plaintiff must present evidence of its title in all cases, and the court must render judgment based on that evidence. With a cooperative court and no contested issues, a matter may reach resolution as quickly as six months. In practice, courts vary significantly and a summons alone can take six weeks in certain counties, with even an uncontested matter running close to a year. Contested cases involving disputed factual issues will run longer still and may involve discovery and even a jury trial.
Where Things Go Wrong
Slander of title exposure. The lis pendens that is essential to the quiet title action also creates risk. A defendant whose ability to sell, finance, or develop the property is impaired by the recorded notice can cross-claim for slander of title. The practical takeaway is that before filing, the agency needs to be confident its title theory will hold up. Filing on a weak theory carries fee exposure.
A preliminary title report is not enough. A preliminary title report (PTR) or title commitment, the standard title search products that identify recorded interests against a property, are the starting point, not a substitute for a full chain-of-title search going back to the first transfer of title to the property out of government ownership and tracing every single transfer of the property through to the present day. Quiet title requires all these underlying deeds. For example, some quiet title claims rest on adverse possession, gaining ownership of land by openly occupying it for a set number of years, or on a prescriptive easement, gaining the right to use part of someone else’s land, such as a driveway or footpath, by openly using it for that same period. Both depend on the clock running uninterrupted for the full statutory period. But that clock does not run while the federal government, or any other state or public entity, owns the land. So no matter how long someone occupies or uses government property, they cannot acquire rights in it. So, if the government owned the property during the years the claimant is counting on, the claim fails. A preliminary title report would not reveal that stretch of federal ownership, while a full chain of title would. Further, finding a title company or service able to do that work can be a challenge in counties with older or incomplete records.
Old documents create evidentiary challenges. Most parties will stipulate to the admissibility of recorder-stamped documents, but not always. It may be necessary to subpoena the county recorder’s office to get documents admitted into evidence. Interpreting the language of old recorded instruments is usually a legal question for the judge, but it can become a factual dispute that ends up before a jury, with all the complexity that entails. The further back in time the title instrument, the harder it is to find evidence of what the parties intended. Title officer expertise matters here: work with title officers who have deep knowledge of California property law and historical practices – including those going back to Spanish land grant ranchos – is critical because that expertise is not universal and the knowledge gap creates litigation risks.
One Advantage Agencies Have
As described in the example above, adverse possession and prescriptive easements cannot run against public entities under California law (Civil Code § 1007 and related statutes). So, when it is a public agency quieting title, this law works in the agency’s favor and defendants who attempt to defeat the agency’s quiet title action by asserting these theories face a statutory bar, not just a factual hurdle. It doesn’t simplify a case where the agency’s own title is contested on other grounds, but it forecloses one common category of competing claim.
Key Takeaways
Don’t let a project deadline be the first time a title question gets examined. Engage title officers and experienced counsel early when there is still time to consider alternatives to litigation. Treat the preliminary title report as a starting point and order a full chain-of-title search before filing. Assess slander-of-title exposure before recording a lis pendens. Set realistic timeline expectations: Six months is highly optimistic, and contested matters can run significantly longer. And when quiet title is what’s needed, do it right: Shortcuts on service or pleading can undermine the judgment’s value at exactly the moment the agency needs it most.
For more information, please contact Caitlin Brown, Andrew Schwartz or Matt Zinn.
Photo by Anthony Fomin on Unsplash