Bundle of Rights & Finder's Law Flashcards
(86 cards)
What is the Majority Test in Pierson v. Post regarding wild animals?
Mere pursuit is insufficient to constitute ‘occupancy’ of a wild animal on un-owned property; capturing or mortally wounding an animal is required to create a property interest.
Keep in mind that if the pursuer trespasses with his body or an object–>that will constitute as trespass and loses processionary interest in the wild animal
What constitutes capturing a wild animal according to the Majority Test?
Mortally wounding an animal or any act that deprives it of its natural liberty and renders escape impossible.
What is the Minority/Dissent Test in Pierson v. Post?
There must be a hot pursuit or a reasonable prospect of claiming occupancy of the wild animal.
What is the general rule regarding capturing wild animals on owned land?
Property owners have constructive possession of wild animals while they remain on their property.
What is the general rule regarding the CL right of publicity?
Individuals have a limited property right to the exclusive use of their name, likeness, voice, and identity for financial gain.
Is a plaintiff required to show a possibility of confusion in a right of publicity claim?
No, unauthorized use such as misappropriation is sufficient.
What limitations exist on the right of publicity?
It is limited by First Amendment guarantees of free speech and does not protect against parodies or news media use.
What is the Bundle of Rights in property law?
These rights can be unbundled to give some away while retaining a property interest.
What is the general rule regarding the Right to Transfer property?
An owner may freely transfer or alienate any property owned, subject to public policy limitations.
What case established that property rights exist only to the extent recognized by the government?
Johnson v. M’Intosh.
□ Applying U.S. law, the court would hold that the U.S. citizens hold title.
□ In Johnson, Justice Marshall announced that “conquest gives a title which the Courts of the conqueror cannot deny.”
What does the Moore v. Regents of UC case illustrate about transferring body parts?
A person loses property rights in cells once control is relinquished; a claim of conversion would likely not apply.
you have a property interest to some part of your body, however some other body parts cannot be transferred
§ Bc some body parts can be reproduced while other parts cannot be reproduced
Since Moore is largely driven by policy where courts weigh the importance of preventing theft versus the importance of relinquishing control, although the majority in Moore will considers other factors to find who may claim the property interest of the body part.
Right to Exlcude
What is the general rule regarding the Right to Exclude others from property?
The owner has the right to exclude others unless the entry is privileged.
Right to Exclude
What constitutes a privileged entry onto private property?
Consent from the owner or necessity.
Right to Exclude
what can non-owners do to enter private property to save lives or property of others to avert serious harm?
® A person charged with trespass may use the defense of necessity if the individual can show that he or she acted to prevent an imminent harm/peril and had no legal alternative to violating the law to try to prevent the harm.
® OR intrusion is privileged if it is necessary for the exercise of a legitimate public authority
® Where the privilege to enter exists based on necessity, the privilege extends only for the specific act justifying entry
Right to Exclude
What was established in Jacque v. Steenberg Homes regarding trespass?
An owner’s right to exclude others is implemented through the tort of trespass, where intentional entry constitutes trespass.
§ An entry under privilege is not a trespass. Privilege can arise by:
® consent
® OR necessity
The privilege to intrude upon private lands exists as a balance between the legitimate rights of the property owner to be free from intrusion and the legitimate needs of society to impose reasonable burdens on the land for the general welfare.
Right to Exclude
What is the Fair Adjustment Standard Test from State v. Shack?
Courts balance the landowner’s right to exclude against the human value of others on the land.
Is balanced is triggered when the landowner invites others to enter his land
§ Title to real property cannot include unlimited dominion over ppl the owner allows onto the property
§ Especially when the services provided are given by the government for the people on the landowner’s land
Right to Use
What is the general rule regarding the Right to Use property?
You have a right to use your property for any lawful purpose without injuring adjacent owners’ rights.
Right to Use
What is the private nuisance test?
A claim must show 1) intentional, 2) nontrespassory, 3) unreasonable, and substantial interference with 4) the use and enjoyment of the plaintiff’s land.
Unreasonableness is viewed objectively from the perspective of whether a reasonable person (not the actual landowner) would expect the property owner to bear the burden imposed
(i.e., whether the gravity of the harm outweighs the actor’s conduct).
Right to Exclude
What is the Spite Fence Doctrine?
It prevents an owner from erecting and maintaining an otherwise useless structure solely to injure a neighbor.
requires proof that D acted with malice
And if D can ID any beneficial use for the structure like advertising or marketing then the structure is not useless regardless if there was malice present
Right to Destroy
What is the general rule regarding the Right to Destroy property?
Society does not tolerate waste and destruction of resources affecting important interests of others. But this depends on a case by case basis.
Right to Destroy
What factors do courts consider regarding the Right to Destroy?
Public policy, personal autonomy, and efficiency.
Vertical Dimensions –> Airspace Rights
What is the significance of the 5th Amendment Takings Clause in property law?
It prohibits the taking of private property for public use without just compensation.
Vertical Dimensions –> Airspace Rights
What did the Causby case rule regarding airspace rights?
Landowners do not have an absolute right to control airspace; AND flights must not substantially interfere with use and enjoyment of the surface above ground
if flights are so low and frequent to be direct & immediate interference –> amounts to compensable taking.
What are the three zones of airspace identified in the Causby case?
- Immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere (where owner’s has exclusive control)
- Region immidately above that zone used for light and air
- Region above low altitude with little or no rights
