To repeal a provision of the code relating to the limitation on bringing an action to enter upon or recover lands
Summary
HB 4078 would repeal a specific provision of the West Virginia Code that limits the time in which a person may bring an action to enter upon or recover lands. In practical terms, the bill removes an existing statutory limitation tied to certain real-property recovery claims, leaving the underlying cause of action to be governed by whatever other statutes, common-law rules, or procedural limits remain applicable.
Because the bill text is not available in the provided materials, the measure can only be described at a high level from its caption. Its apparent purpose is to eliminate a code section dealing with land recovery actions, which could affect property owners, heirs, adverse possessors, and parties involved in boundary, title, or possession disputes. The bill was referred to House Judiciary, indicating it was being considered as a legal and property-law measure.
Impact
The bill would amend state law by repealing the code provision that sets a limitation on actions to enter upon or recover lands. That would remove one statutory time bar from West Virginia’s property law framework and could alter how courts handle certain real-estate possession or title disputes, depending on what other limitations periods or doctrines still apply. The practical effect would be on litigants asserting claims to land, including owners seeking to recover property and parties defending possession or title.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct public sentiment can be measured from debate or roll call. Based on the bill’s referral to House Judiciary and its narrow legal subject matter, the measure appears to be a technical property-law bill rather than a broad policy proposal, which often draws limited but focused attention from legal and real-estate stakeholders.
Contention
The main point of contention, if any, would likely concern whether repealing the limitation period creates uncertainty or expands the window for land-recovery litigation. Supporters would likely view the repeal as a cleanup of outdated or unnecessary code language, while opponents might worry about stale claims, title stability, and increased exposure for current possessors or record owners. No specific positions from legislators, agencies, or outside groups are provided in the available record.