PROBLEM A Santa-acre and Elfacre are neighboring parcels of land. S is adjacent to a garbage dump. E...

PROBLEM A

Santa-acre and Elfacre are neighboring parcels of land. S is adjacent to a garbage dump. E is a big lot containing a small cottage. The owners agree that:

E’s owners shall have the right to cross S to dump garbage in the adjacent garbage

dump. Later, E’s owners tear down the cottage and put up a

toy factory, which produces seven times the garbage that the cottage did. Discuss whether they can use the right of way to dump the factory’s garbage.

Reasonable considering terms of grant ?





Evolutionary not revolutionary change allowed?





Greater burden than contemplated by parties?





Problem A: Possible Concerns

1. Want precision in language: punish Santa for not specifying limits

2. Want people to bargain fairly

3. Check unequal bargaining power

4. Check who drafted


1. Want precision in language

2. Want people to bargain fairly: punish elves if hid intent to expand factory






3. Check unequal bargaining powerA. Santa, Inc. v. little elves

B. Old man v. Keebler Cookies & Toys Int’lKeebler Cookies & Toys Int’l






4. Check who drafted: construe against the drafter

Problem B

• Mike gets poor TV reception b/c of valley location• Debbie owns neighboring ranch above M’s land• 1962 Agreement: “[Owner of M’s land] may place

and maintain an antenna onto [Debbie’s] barn and run wires from the antenna to [M’s land] to allow television reception for that property.”

• Antenna installed; reception still not good; cable unavailable

• 2007: M wants to put a satellite dish where antenna is now, but D objects.

Arguments from Marcus Cable?





Arguments from Chevy Chase?





Thoughts on Dupont

• Bad facts for servient owners: their own story is revoking license after 14 years

• If Whiteside’s version of facts is true, good case for easement by estoppel: – Purchasing land & building expensive house =

detrimental reliance– Duponts building road prior to closing

probably makes reliance reasonable

• No easement by implicaton (no prior use)

• No easement by prescription (permission)

Thoughts on Dupont

Easement by Necessity Tricky• Road to Southern part of lot when purchased,

so lot as a whole is not landlocked

• House on Northern part not built when purchased, so no necessity for enjoyment

• Would have to view as two separate parcels divided by water with no access between them to get E-mt by Nec. to Northern part

• What if road crossing wetlands easy in 1981?

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTIONcontinued

still featuring

TEMPTATIONS

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTIONELEMENTS: ADVERSITY

Note 2: What is the significance of the following presumptions?

1. Continuous use for AP Period presumed Adverse (MacDonald)

2. Public recreational use presumed Permissive (Lyons)

3. Shared use with the owner (e.g., of a driveway) presumed Permissive (Texas)

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTIONELEMENTS: ADVERSITY

Presumptions frequently decide cases because hard to disprove.

Policy Q: What do you do with case like MacDonald or Dupont where use continues for a long time and then servient owner says no? (plausible to say permissive)

Could create hybrid of prescription & estoppel: if use goes on long enough, can’t change your mind.

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTIONELEMENTS: OPEN & NOTORIOUS

DQ111. Evidence of “open and notorious”:

• MacDonald Properties requires actual notice; other states do not. Is it a good idea to do so?

• Can a claim of prescriptive easement with regard to underground utilities like sewer pipes ever be open and notorious?

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTION:POLICY QUESTIONS

DQ112. “The best justifications for granting an implied easement are reliance and need. Thus, if claimants cannot meet the elements of an Easement by Estoppel or of an Easement by Necessity, they should not be able to get a Prescriptive Easement unless they pay market value for it.”

Do you agree?

EASEMENTS BY PRESCRIPTION:POLICY QUESTIONS

Note 6: Should there be prescriptive rights to commit nuisance? (Any reason not to let statute of limitations operate as it does for trespass?)

Note 8: Pros & Cons of different legal approaches to public beach access? (for you)

Introduction to Promissory Servitudes

Contracts Regarding Land that Bind Subsequent Owners

• Origins in Landlord-Tenant Law: Bind Assignees to Terms of Lease

• Modern Neighbors: Many Agreements Not Worth Much Unless Binding

• Refer to Ageements that Bind as “Running with the Land”

Common Law Disfavored, So Strict Technical Elements

• Over time, easier and easier to do

• Short essays on historic development in readings

Major Categories are Causes of Action, Not Things

• Is agreement “enforceable as a real covenant”? (= can you get damages)

• Is agreement “enforceable as an equitable servitude”? (= can you get injunction)

• Agreement can be enforceable as both

• Very difficult to ensure at time of agreement that it will be enforceable later as either.

BASIC ELEMENTS

REAL COVENANT• Intent to Bind

Successors• Touch & Concern• [Notice]• Privity

EQUITABLE SERVITUDE• Intent to Bind

Successors• Touch & Concern• Notice

Touch & Concern

• Begins as literal requirement re physical connection to land

• Evolves into less and less literal test

• Today often replaced by reasonableness tests

• We’ll look at Friday in detail

PRIVITY: See Chart P894

Privity = sufficient legal conection between party trying to enforce original promise & party who would have to conform to it

• Horizontal privity = connection between original parties to the agreement

• Vertical privity = connection between original party and current party to dispute

Need to memorize relationships that qualify

NOTICE (of Conflicting Property Rights)

• Actual Notice: Fact Question

• Constructive Notice: Generally Legal Q– Record Notice (from public records)– Inquiry Notice (facts suggesting

conflicting interest)

NOTICE & THE NOTICE & THE RECORDING RECORDING

SYSTEMSYSTEM

Operation of the Recording System

• Every jurisd. in US has recording office

• If a real property interest is transferred, normally record document– Deeds, Mortgages, Easements– Court judgments; lis pendens etc.

• Clerks of court: blind recipients w date stamps

• County keeps documents & notes in indexes

Purposes of Recording System

• Provides public record of land titles: gov’t knows who is responsible

• Secures copies of important documents• Provides notice to subsequent buyers

– Can see chain of title of seller– Can see non-ownership interests (e.g.,

easements, other servitudes)– Gives grantees incentive to record

Recording Acts: Problem Addressed

• Transfer of Interest in Same Property to Two Different Grantees(OA, OB)– Can be resale of whole parcel– More frequently, transfer of partial interest

(e.g., easement or mineral rights) that conflicts with later transfer of complete interest

• O liable for fraud or breach of warranty– A v. B: who gets lawsuit & who gets ppty rt?– Common law answer: 1st in time = 1st in Right

Recording Acts: Operation

• Recording has no effect on rights of parties to original transaction as betw. themselves: – Unrecorded OA deed still valid– O can’t defend suit by A by saying “unrecorded”

• Protects buyers who record against other transferees – Often yields different results than 1st in time– Most jurisdictions protect later BFP for value

against unrecorded interests

BFP for VALUE: Definitions

Bona Fide Purchaser = good faith

• No notice of prior transaction

• Status is specific to one prior transaction

• Can only be true of later player

What is value? (jurisdiction specific)

• donees, heirs, devisees usually not prot’d

• split re amount of consideration needed

3 Kinds of Recording Acts

1. Race

2. Notice

3. Race-Notice


1. Race– 1st to Record Wins– N.C. + La. + Del. for all interests– Some others for some specific interests

2. Notice

3. Race-Notice


1. Race

2. Notice– Protects BFP for Value ag. Prior

unrecorded interests regardless of when or if BFP records

– About half the states (e.g. TX + FL)

3. Race-Notice


1. Race

2. Notice

3. Race-Notice– Protects BFP for Value ag. prior unrecorded

interests only if BFP records 1st– About half the states (e.g. NY + CA)

DQ113: Situation 1

OA

OB (BFP)

B records [O B deed]

A records [O A deed]

WHO WINS IN …?• RACE:• NOTICE:• RACE-NOTICE:

DQ113: Situation 1

OA

OB (BFP)

B records [O B deed]

A records [O A deed]

WHO WINS IN …?• RACE: B• NOTICE: B• RACE-NOTICE: B

DQ113: Situation 2

OA

A records

OB

B records


DQ113: Situation 2

OA

A records

OB

B records

WHO WINS IN …?• RACE: A• NOTICE: A• RACE-NOTICE: A

Moral of Situations 1 & 2:

If you record immediately, you are always in the best

position possible.

DQ113: Situation 3

OA

OB (NOT BFP)

B records

A records


DQ113: Situation 3

OA

OB (NOT BFP)

B records

A records

WHO WINS IN …?• RACE: B• NOTICE: A• RACE-NOTICE: A

RACE STATUTE: PROTECTS BAD FAITH PURCHASER WHO RECORDS FIRST

DQ113: Situation 4

OA

OB (BFP)

A records

B records


DQ113: Situation 4

OA

OB (BFP)

A records

B records

WHO WINS IN …?• RACE: A• NOTICE: B• RACE-NOTICE: A

NOTICE STATUTE: PROTECTS BFP EVEN IF DOESN’T RECORD FIRST

PROBLEM A Santa-acre and Elfacre are neighboring parcels of land. S is adjacent to a garbage dump. E...

Documents

Transcript of PROBLEM A Santa-acre and Elfacre are neighboring parcels of land. S is adjacent to a garbage dump. E...