Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

staradvertiser.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 195 posts

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#11

Post by curun1r »

haywardsmyfault wrote: post #2

You could argue some of the land parcels in question are owned by growing numbers of family members with each new generation, and that therefore it's likely some (even most) owners wouldn't utilize the land. However, it's also interesting to digest this situation alongside Oxfam's report [1] on 62 people accumulating more wealth than half the world's population combined. Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn…

> Why isn't that enough?

According to the article, the owners of the parcels have the right to traverse the land he already bought. From the sound of the article, this is making a mountain out of a molehill.

He wants his privacy and, thanks to bizarre land ownership practices in Hawaii, these parcels are fractionally owned by hundreds of individuals making it impossible to make a traditional offer. This legal process, far from being abusive, is the standard process when dealing with these sorts of parcels since it clarifies who actually owns the properties. It sounds like once the list of owners is established by the court, he'll make a traditional offer rather than forcing an auction.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#12

Post by ryandrake »

haywardsmyfault wrote: post #2

You could argue some of the land parcels in question are owned by growing numbers of family members with each new generation, and that therefore it's likely some (even most) owners wouldn't utilize the land. However, it's also interesting to digest this situation alongside Oxfam's report [1] on 62 people accumulating more wealth than half the world's population combined. Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn…

> Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn't that enough?

"Enough" is not a word in some people's vocabulary.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#13

Post by enraged_camel »

>>Now the Facebook CEO is trying to enhance the seclusion of his property by filing several lawsuits aimed at forcing these families to sell their land at a public court auction to the highest bidder.

Wait, I thought only the government could force the sale of a piece of land, via Eminent Domain? How can a judge rule that a private party must sell their property to another private party?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#15

Post by disordinary »

Surely his lawyers informed him of the situation when he bought it.

In Hawaii (or the US in general) can people own beaches below the high tide mark? Surely it's impossible to have 100% seclusion anyway as people can land by boat when the tide is low and enjoy at their leisure?

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#17

Post by ajdlinux »

sb8244 wrote: post #10

I'm struggling to make sense of this....Zuckerberg purchased 700 acres of land, but other families are still using that land (or have the right to)? How can you purchase land that others legally own?

He owns land that surrounds these land parcels.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#18

Post by ChuckMcM »

kem wrote: post #7

I admit this is confusing to me, but the premise of this makes no sense to me. It seems that the sale should still require some vote on the part of the identified shareholders on whether or not to sell. Isn't this basically saying that a ridiculously wealthy individual like Zuckerberg could force a family to sell their inherited lands to him at whatever price he wants to pay, as long as no one offers a higher price?…

All states can have different laws so it is hard to comment as a non-Hawaiian. That said, my wife helped settle the estate of her great uncle who held title to property with his deceased ex-wife. One option was a quiet title hearing where you try to contact everyone who might have an interest in the property, and then inform them of a court hearing. In Washington state if they show up and can prove they should have part owner ship, then the court creates a title which includes them as owner. If nobody shows up the court can update the title to make the person who is currently possessing the land the exclusive owner.

My understanding of what the article said, was that if these Hawaiians showed up and had proof of their ancestral ownership (probably ancestry records of some sort), then they would be added to the title and at that time Zuckerberg could negotiate with them for the sale of their ownership interest to him. Could be a big payday for some Hawaiians as you have a lot of leverage.

But if they don't know about the trial and/or don't show up, then they forfeit their interest.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#19

Post by mjfl »

noobermin wrote: post #9

If Zuck truly is planning to run for office as some speculation has supposed, this does not look good for that. This reeks terribly, I was unaware this was even legal, but this is almost literally depriving someone of their property because you have the money.

The news story also reaks of a cliche smear-job though. I have a hard time Zuckerberg sits on moneybags in his house cursing the filthy peasants. Seems like it's more just a weird land practice (many people own the land he thought he bought) and he wants some privacy.

Re: Facebook’s Zuckerberg sues to force land sales

#20

Post by rl3 »

snogglethorpe wrote: post #5
haywardsmyfault wrote: post #2

You could argue some of the land parcels in question are owned by growing numbers of family members with each new generation, and that therefore it's likely some (even most) owners wouldn't utilize the land. However, it's also interesting to digest this situation alongside Oxfam's report [1] on 62 people accumulating more wealth than half the world's population combined. Zuckerberg owns 700 acres of Kauai[2]. Why isn…

Why should it matter how they use the land? If they want to use it purely to irritate Zuckerberg, that's their business.

Maybe they'll organize using Facebook. An "irritate Mark Zuckerberg" group.
Post reply on HN