100%(3)3 out of 3 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 4 - 7 out of 7 pages.
4.Wild Deedàrecorded deed not in chain of titleHickey v Green; Lohmeyer v Bower; Stambovsky v Ackley; Johnson v Davis; Jones v Lee;Kutzin v Pirnie; Sweeney v Sweeney; Brown v LoberCreation of EasementsTermination of Easements1.By an express grant or reservation2.By implication - Prior use or by (strict)necessityi.Prior use requiresapparent servitude,continuity, necessity3.By prescriptiona.Open & notorious, continuous,hostile, under claim of rightVan Standt v Royster; Othen v Rosier; Willardv First Church of Christ; Kienzle v Myers1.Expiration (time)2.Merger of Title3.Release by holder of easement4.Abandonment (clear intent req’d)5.Cessation of purpose of the easement(only for easements by necessity)6.Destruction of servient tenement7.Prescriptionàif servient tenementowner excludes easement holder foruse for the statute of limitations.
CovenantsIf over 1 yearàmust be in writing.A covenant will run with the land if:1.Must have been in writing2.Intent of original parties was that it would run with the land3.Must touch and concern the land4.Horizontal privity5.Vertical privity (entire interest transferred)6.Transferee had actual or constructive notice at time of taking possessionTulk v Moxhay;River Heights v BattenàEquitable servitudes only need elements 1, 2, 3 & 6 to be enforceableReal Covenant to run with the land = (1) Must touch & concern the land; (2) Horizontal privity:shared interest in the land at time of contract; (3) intent to bind successors-Mutual Covenant Between Neighborsàno shared interest in landoEnforceable as contract between original partiesoMAY be enforceable on successors as equitable servitudeoMutual restrictions on land use.-Covenants that do not touch and concern the land are still enforceable as contractsbetween the original parties.Eminent Domain (5thAmendment)1.Any takings by gov’t must be for a public use AND2.Any gov’t that does take property, even for public use, must fully compensate the ownerof the property.Kelo v City of New London“Public Use”can be for: (1) Public Health; (2) Safety; (3) Morals or (4) General WelfareRegulatory TakingsStandard approach: Ad Hoc Balancing-PA Coal v Mahon; PA Central v City of New YorkCategorical Rules:1.Permanent physical occupation authorized by gov’t is a taking.2.Economic use doctrine: If a zoning law eliminates all economically viable use of a parcelof property then it is a taking per se.Loretto v Teleprompter; Lucas v SC Coastal Council
AssignmentLeaseLicenseEasementCreationWhen the original tenanttransfers leasehold toanother tenantforremaining term. Assigneebecomes liable to originallessor & not assignor orlessee. Transfer of rightswhere the Assignee stepsinto the shoes of theoriginal lessee.