Then, a couple pages later they explain the term or concept, and you realize that when they first mentioned it, you weren't supposed to know what it was yet. If that seems like a terrible way to structure a book to you, then you're right, and I agree. Let me explain a different way: Concept A is introduced and explained. In the explanation the authors distinguish concept A from concept B.
Of course, concept B has not been explained yet so the distinction they draw means nothing to you. You wonder if maybe you missed the page where they explained concept B because this is the first time you are seeing it. You look for it in the previous pages but can't find it.
So you keep going: Concept A is explained further, an example is given, and then concept B is explained. After you read the explanation of concept B you can go back and re-read the distinction they drew, which will now make much more sense.
There is also, a complete lack of summary or conclusion following each topic, sub-topic, or chapter. Even a list of the rules, terms, and concepts covered in that particular section, appearing at the end of the section, would be extremely useful.
Property, arguably more so than other 1st year law classes, has its own extensive language. Most of this language was developed in medieval times based on antiquated concepts with no link to contemporary times. The meaning of most terms cannot be arrived at intuitively. So, lacking that, take really good notes while you read. Otherwise you will find yourself searching back though the dense, structurally obtuse text to find the inwoven italicized words that "highlight" important terms.
My other issue with the book has to do with the review problems. These problems are probably the best way to gain mastery over the material. Language eng. Publication St. Paul, MN, West, Extent 1 online resource viii, pages. Isbn Label High court case summaries : keyed to Dukeminier, Krier, Alexander, and Schill's casebook on property, 7th edition, Property Instantiates High court case summaries : keyed to Dukeminier, Krier, Alexander, and Schill's casebook on property, 7th edition, Property Publication St.
Convert currency. Add to Basket. Book Description Condition: new. Seller Inventory think More information about this seller Contact this seller. Book Description Hardcover. Condition: New. Brand New!. Seller Inventory VIB Book is in NEW condition. Sawada v. Endo Supreme Court of Hawaii, P. Sawadas sue and win damages, but Endo conveys tenancy by the entireties to sons, and Sawadas are unable to satisfy their judgments.
As a result, they sue again to set aside the conveyance for satisfaction of the original award. The other rule deals with fraud: Neither conveyance nor creation of a tenancy by the entirety may be used to defraud creditors.
Elkus v. Husband gives up his own career to follow, teach, and critique his wife. Husband also takes care of the children. Wife becomes famous, makes a ton of money, and of course, they divorce. Celebrity status, and its economic value, can be a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.
Varnum v. Brien Supreme Court of Iowa, N. Landlord dies, and the executor of landlord's estate plaintiff orders tenant to leave. Tenant, in a bold display of heroic defiance, refuses. A lease agreement that grants tenant the sole right to terminate creates a "determinable life tenancy" for the tenant.
Hannan v. When plaintiff went to take possession of the property he found that the property was already possessed. The Plaintiff sued the defendant requiring him to provide possession to the plaintiff. Under the American rule,the landlord is not bound to put the tenant into actual possession, but is bound only to put him in legal possession, so that no obstacle in the form of superior right of possession will be interposed to prevent the tenant from obtaining actual possession of the demised premises.
If the landlord gives the tenant a right of possession he has done all that he is required to do by the terms of an ordinary lease, and the tenant assumes the burden of enforcing such right of possession as against all persons wrongfully in possession, whether they be trespassers or former tenants wrongfully holding over. Ernst v. Conditt Court of Appeals of Tennessee, S.
Rogers met with plaintiffs and transfered his lease to defendant who defaulted on the lease. Plaintiffs sued defendant for default. Defendant claimed that the lease was a sublease and not an assignment and consequently, Rogers was liable for his default. If the instrument purports to transfer the lessee's estate for the entire remainder of his term it is an assignment, regardless of its form or of the parties' intention.
Conversely, if the instrument purports to transfer the lessee's estate for less than the entire term--even for a day less--it is a sublease. Additionally, the fact that the original lessee agreed to remain liabile for the remaining terms of the lease does not create a sublease.
Kendall v. Supreme Court of California, P. According to the terms of the lease he contacted the defendant, the successor in interest to the lessor, to gain approval prior to the assignment. The defendant demanded an increased rent before he would approve the assignment. The plaintiff then sued. Where a commercial lease provides for assignment only with the prior consent of the lessor, such consent may be withheld only where the lessor has a commercially reasonable objection to the assignee or the proposed use.
Berg v. Wiley Supreme Court of Minnesota, N. The landlord wrote the tenant a letter requesting that remodling be completed in two weeks. During the two week period, the landlord witnessed what he thought was the destruction of the property and entered the property and changed the locks. The tenant sued for damages and wrongful eviction.
The common-law rule that a landlord may rightfully use self-help to retake leased premises from a tenant in possession without incurring liability for wrongful eviction provided two conditions are met: 1 The landlord is legally entitled to possession, such as where a tenant holds over after the lease term or where a tenant breaches a lease containing a reentry clause; and 2 the landlord's means of reentry are peaceable.
However the law disfavors self help and will rarely find the landlord's actions peaceable. The law is written to push landlords from self-help to the summary process. Sommer v. Before begining the lease, defendant wrote to landlord explaining that a change of circumstances necesitated the cancellation of the lease.
The plaintiff refused to cancel the lease and refused to rent the apartment to alternative tenants stating that the apartment was leased to the defendant. At the end of the term of the lease the plaintiff sued the defendant for the lost rent from the entire term of the original lease. Landlords maintain a duty to mitigate damages. A landlord may mitigate the damages by showing that he treated the property as any other property. The landlord shall be required to carry the burden of proving that he used reasonable diligence in attempting to re-let the premises.
Reste Realty Corp. Whenever a rainstorm occurred, rental property was flooded due to the faulty paving of the driveway. Defendant vacated the proprety due to the flooding. Plaintiff sued claiming breach of contract. Ordinarily a covenant of quiet enjoyment is implied in a lease. When this covenant is breached substantially by the landlord, the courts have applied the doctrine of constructive eviction as a remedy for the tenant.
Under this rule any act or omission of the landlord or of anyone who acts under authority or legal right from the landlord, or of someone having superior title to that of the landlord, which renders the premises substantially unsuitable for the purpose for which they are leased, or which seriously interferes with the beneficial enjoyment of the premises, is a breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment and constitutes a constructive eviction of the tenant.
Hilder v. Peter Supreme Court of Vermont, A. While defendant granted possession to plaintiff, defendant did not take steps to cure defects in the apartment which included, presence of raw sewage, an awful stench and general conditions of disrepair. In the rental of any residential dwelling unit an implied warranty exists in the lease, whether oral or written, that the landlord will deliver over and maintain, throughout the period of the tenancy, premises that are safe, clean and fit for human habitation.
In determining whether there has been a breach of the implied warranty of habitability, a substantial violation of an applicable housing code shall constitute prima facie evidence that there has been a breach of the warranty of habitability. Chicago Board of Realtors, Inc. The ordinance also attempted to unify some of the regulation regarding landlord tenant relationships.
Numerous plaintiffs filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance. Legislative acts adjusting the burdens and benefits of economic life are presumed constitutional, and the burden is on one complaining of a due process violation to establish that the legislature has acted in an arbitrary and irrational way.
Licari v. Blackwelder Appellate Court of Connecticut, A. Plaintiffs inherited property and entered an agreement with a real estate broker to sell the property. Hickey v. Green Appeals Court of Massachusetts, N. Buyer sells his current home in anticipation of the move. Seller informs buyer that she has decided to sell to someone else for more money. Buyer offers to match the higher price, but seller refuses.
A land sale contract that fails to comply with the Statute of Frauds may be specifically enforced if party acted in reasonable reliance and "has so changed his position that injustice can be avoided only by specific enforcement.
Lohmeyer v. Bower Supreme Court of Kansas, P. Bower provides title, which is riddled with a city ordinance and a restrictive covenant, both of which are violated by the property in question. Stambovsky v. Seller of house defendant had reported sightings of poltergeists in the past, thus creating the public perception.
Davis Supreme Court of Florida, So. Further investigation reveals that roof needs major work, which was not disclosed by Johnson. Seller has a duty to disclose when she knows of facts that affect the value of the home AND are NOT readily observable.
Lempke v. The previous owner had contracted with builder defendant to construct a garage. Garage had latent defects, which did not materialize until after Lempke made purchase. A subsequent purchaser may sue a builder or contractor "under an implied warranty theory for latent defects which manifest themselves within a reasonable time after purchase and which cause economic harm.
Sellers subsequently sold the home for less than the orignial agreed purchase price and sued to recover the difference. If a purchaser defaults on a contract to purchase realty, as a general rule, the seller has three alternative remedies. The sellers may 1 seek relief in equity for rescission, 2 offer to perform and bring an action for specific performance, or 3 elect to retain the realty and file suit seeking an award of damages. Where a party elects to sue for damages resulting from a breach of land sale contract, the burden is on that party to present competent evidence to support such claim for damages.
While a subsequent sale is evidence of the market value at the time of breach, it is not conclusive and the court must properly establish the market value at such time. Kutzin v. Defendants agreed to purchase the house and executed a purchase agreement. The defendants did not execute the agreement. Whenever the breaching buyer proves that the deposit exceeds the seller's actual damages suffered as a result of the breach, the buyer may recover the difference.
Brown v. Lober Supreme Court of Illinois, N. When defendant resells and conveys deed to plaintiff, however, there is no mention of this reserved interest. Plaintiff then sells to a third party and the partial interest is discovered.
An owner's discovery that there exists a superior title to a portion of its land does NOT constitute a sufficient constructive eviction to breach a covenant of quiet enjoyment. NOTE: Such discovery is sufficient to claim action on a breach of covenant of seisin watch out for statute of limitations.
Frimberger v. Anzellotti Appellate Court of Connecticut, A. Defendant conveys land to plaintiff with a warranty deed. Plaintiff then orders a survey of the land so that he can do repairs, but discovers that, unbeknownst to all, the property stands in violation of general wetland statutes.
Gray Supreme Court of Iowa, N. The propety eventually went through foreclosure. The property was transfered many times and finally the plaintiff brought suit seeking to set aside the original foreclosure for lack of jurisdiction. The covenant of seizin runs with the land, and is broken the instant the conveyance is delivered, and then becomes a chose in action held by the covenantee in the deed, and that a deed by said first covenantee operates as an assignment of such chose in action to a remote grantee, who can maintain an action thereon against the grantor in the original deed.
The rights of the remote grantee are acquired by conveyance assignment and not by virtue of actual possession of the premises. Sweeney v. Maurice and John then draft, execute, and hand over a second deed to Maurice, which conveys the property back to Maurice in case John should die before Maurice. Maurice dies. The widow plaintiff contends that there was delivery of the second deed, and thus, the property is hers.
When a deed is formally executed and delivered, "there is a rebuttable presumption that the grantee assented. Rosengrant Court of Appeals of Oklahoma, P. Murphy v. Supreme Court of New Hampshire, A. Fifteen years later plaintiff lost his job and fell seven months behind on the mortgage. In an effort to avoid foreclosure, plaintiffs paid the back payments but failed to pay the legal fees and costs. The lender foreclosed and the house was sold at auction.
The only bidder was a reprsentative for the lender who bid the exact amount owed on the mortgage. The lenders solder the property later that day for a sizeable profit. Inadequacy of price alone is not sufficient to demonstrate bad faith unless the price is so low as to shock the judicial conscience. Commonwealth v. Lending institutions that make subprime loans that are in compliance with banking specific laws and regulations, may still be considered "unfair and deceptive practices".
Additionally, where "loans [are] made to borrowers on terms that showed they would be unable to pay and therefore were likely to lead to default [are] unsafe and unsound, and probably unfair," and the lender shall not be allowed to collect on foreclosure without the court's approval.
Bean v. Years later, after having paid off nearly half the value, defendant suffers injury and is unable to make payments. Owner plaintiff brings suit to retake possession of property and keep all past payments as liquidated damages. In land sale contracts, the buyer acquires an equitable interest in the property. Thus, a seller must "proceed to foreclose the [buyer]'s equitable title OR bring an action at law for the purchase price" in order to assert his own rights.
Luthi v. Evans Supreme Court of Kansas, P. Corporation recorded the interests Later she deeded similar interests to a different party. Second party checked with the recorder's office and could not find any record of the previous conveyance. The issue of this case is the ownership of the oil and gas rights.
Recordings which do not describe with sufficient specificity the property covered by the conveyance, are not sufficient to impart constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser. Additionally, if a subsequent purchaser has no actual knowledge of the prior assignment, the later assignment prevails over the assignment from Owens to Tours Orr v.
Elliott subsequently acquired and sold property that was subject to Plaintiff's judgment. During the sale the title of the property did not indicate the judgment due to the misspelling of debtor's name.
Plaintiff brought suit against the purchaser of the property for the enforcement of the lien. The burden is on the judgment creditor to take appropriate action to ensure the judgment lien will be satisfied. If the creditor fails to correctly spell the name, the court will not modify the doctrine of constructive notice to pass liability on innocent purchasers. Messersmith v. Unfortunately, Messersmith had already conveyed her land to the Plaintiff, who had not yet recorded the conveyance.
Board of Education of Minnesota v. Hughes Supreme Court of Minnesota, N. Grantor then conveyed the parcel again to real estate developers who also recorded the deed.
Real estate developers deeded property to plaintiff who sued to quiet title. Deed to the plaintiff was recorded before the deed to the defendant A subsequent purchaseris protected by the recording of his deed before the prior deed was recorded. Guilette v. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, N. Defendant owns a plot in the subdivision and wishes to construct a multi-family apartment buidling on his plot.
Defendant's deed mentions the subdivision, but does not contain any restrictions on defendant's use of the property. Where the common grantor has not bound his remaining land by writing, we have held that the statute of frauds prevents enforcement of restrictions against the grantor or a subsequent purchaser of a lot not expressly restricted.
Where, as here, however, the grantor binds his remaining land by writing, reciprocity of restriction between the grantor and grantee can be enforced.
Daniels v. Anderson Supreme Court of Illinois, N. Contained in the agreement to purchase these lots was a right of first refusal on one of the other lots.
Defendant entered into an agreement with purchaser to purchase this lot. After entering into a contract, but before paying all consideration, purchaser learned of plaintiff's right through actual notice. Plaintiff sued seeking specific performance of the contract. A bona fide purchaser is a person who takes title to real property in good faith for value without notice of outstanding rights or interests of others.
A bona fide purchaser takes such title free of any interests of third persons, except such interests of which he has notice. A buyer who, prior to the payment of any consideration receives notice of an outstanding interest, pays the consideration at his or her peril with respect to the holder of the outstanding interest.
Such a buyer is not protected as a bona fide purchaser and takes the property bound by the outstanding interest. Lewis v. After entering escrow, a third party recorded a federal lis pendens. This lis pendens was not indexed until after the petitioners acquired title to the property. After acquiring title the petitionersbegan renovating the property.
This renovation involved a substantial sum. During the renovation, petitioners learned of the lis pendes. They filed a motion for summary judgment which was denied. In order to prove fraudlent conveyance the plaintiff must prove that a party colluded with the debtor or otherwise actively participate din the fraudulent scheme of the debtor.
0コメント