It looks like he was working toward an adverse possession claim. In Florida it's 7 years of "open and notorious" possession, as well as paying all property taxes (which it sounds like he did), filing a letter with the appraiser's office (which it sounds like he did), and improving the property (which he did). His adverse possession claim was interrupted 4 years into the 7 year clock, and then he tried to file an "unjust enrichment" claim to get the money he spent on the property back.
His big mistake was forging the signature and impersonating the decedent. If he'd just signed under his own name and hoped nobody noticed, no felonies would've been committed and he would have a case to get back the $200K in the "unjust enrichment" lawsuit.
I'm quite sure you can't actually claim adverse posession on anything that is court administered (ie in probate) - if that were the case, you'd have people coming out of woodwork left and right to try that just given how long probate takes in general.
Probaby a long shot to find someone admitted to the Florida bar to chime in here.
I don't see anything in the statute that would support that:
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2018/95.18
I asked Gemini specifically about the loophole you highlight, and why more people don't commit adverse possession on houses that are in probate. It came up with:
1) Probate usually takes far less than 7 years - in this news story, it was done in 3
2) The adverse possession claim will come up on any title search, which any probate attorney or real estate agent would likely do. From the article, it looks like this is what actually caught the cop here.
3) Usually heirs that want to keep the house will pay property taxes on it. This resets the clock, and they'll get notification that somebody has already paid the taxes on it when they try to do so.
For people who aren't paying property taxes, aren't actively checking on or maintaining the property, and aren't trying to sell it - those are exactly the cases that adverse possession laws are trying to solve. The state believes that it's better for people to actively maintain properties and pay taxes on them, and if you don't do that, you risk losing your claim on them.
It's 20 years without color of deed, meaning he would have needed a legitimate deed that conflicted with the deceased mans deed for the 7 year time line.
Are you sure you aren't thinking of prescriptive easements instead:
https://ilabacalaw.com/blog/real-estate/florida-easement-law...
The Florida statute on adverse possession explicitly says 7 years, with no exceptions:
https://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2018/95.18
You're right
Is seven years a common timeline for adverse possession to the point that title conveys without compensation?
It varies, and is on the shorter end. The shortest is California/Montana/Nevada at 5 years; the longest is Louisiana/NJ at 30. 10-15 years is average.