Cases Flashcards

Question

M’Intosh (1823)

Answer 1

Two grants of land from Native Tribes Title cannot be granted because Native tribes couldn’t convey it in the first place; Europeans claimed ownership of land and let native peoples live on it

Answer 2

Copyright Term Extension act (Disney rule) is fine becaus it applies to both existing and future work (no disadvantage for filling copyright before a certain day) brings in line with EU nations Dissent: extension makes copyright protection nearly perpetual and would stifle innovation

Answer 3

International News would have people read the AP bulletins and report it back without paying for the AP Ct: this is unfair competition plus misappropriation of the news product; there is a quasi property interest in news because they are both selling it

Answer 4

Meyer sent unsolicited ad idea to a company and asked for reasonable compensation if they used it. They ran a different but similar ad a few years later Ct says no, you had no contract and this isn’t the exact same

Answer 5

Anti-alcohol football player’s pic is used in an alc calendar after getting pic from the university Ct says right of privacy doesn’t apply because public figure,

Answer 6

Bette Middler song that they had the rights to was used in a Ford commercial. Sung by someone that sounded like her. Ct: Middler’s voice is protected because it is unique and this is an attempt to pirate her identity

Answer 7

Adverse possession case: the fence was in the wrong place by mistake (the jog fence tidelands case) Ct: possession by mistake is still “hostile” or “antagonistic” because using the property like an owner would in an obvious manner Concepts: Adverse possession

Answer 8

Carpenter used an empty lot next to their property for 30 years and installed part of driveway and propane tank. Ruperto owned the lot. Ct: need a good faith claim of right or claim of title, Carpenter knew her lot didn’t include that parcel, doesn’t want to give rights to squatters Concepts: Adverse Possession, claim of right, claim of title * good faith is not required in most states

Answer 9

Adverse possession of vacation homes because of land surveyors error, everyone was living on property 50 feet from actual title Ct: tacking lets us get adverse possession even though there are successive possessors because they possessors were in contract with each other, summer occupancy is still continuous because using it like an owner would Concepts- adverse possession, continuity of possession, tacking

Answer 10

O’Keefe alleges her painting was stolen from Stieglitz’s gallery years ago. Lots of factual conflict. It was well over 10 years ago, but is it limited by SOL because she didn’t discover who had paintings? Ct: remand because of factual questions, discovery rule— a cause of action will not accrue until the injured party discovers, or by exercise of reasonable diligence and intelligence should have discovered facts which form the basis of a cause of cation, adverse possession applies to chattels in that the statute of limitations runs out so title has to go somewhere it goes to possessor Whole bunch of dicta— art world registry, provenance stuff Concepts- adverse possession, real property v chattels

Answer 11

Corporation conveyed land to Klamath Falls “so long as” the land was used for a library. Then transfer to named parties. Land stopped being used for a library so the city asks whose it is. Potential RAP problem— fee simple determinable that might not ever vest, so not ok. Who does the land go to, not the city because respect wishes of person/corporation that conveyed it. So goes back to the corporation. Corporation was dissolved so goes to 2 remaining shareholders Concepts- estates, RAP, divided ownerships

Answer 12

Deed conveyed to a lodge— “said property is restricted for the use and benefit of the [lodge] and in the event that the same fails to be used by the second party, the same is to revert to the first parties, their successors, heirs and assigns” Ct: this is a fee simple subject to condition subsequent, no alienation issue here * i don’t understand this one

Answer 13

Woman writes a note before surgery about where she hid lots of property and who she wants it to go to. Her estate split it up differently. Is this a gift causa mortis from Ethel, or do we follow the will? Ct: must be “actual, unequivocal, and complete delivery [of the gift] during the donor, wholly divesting him of the possessions, dominion and control,” no actual and complete delivery, so the will stands Dissent: the property was in the house they shared, so that is delivery, but doesn’t love the requirement of delivery Concepts: wills/estates, gift causa mortis

Answer 14

Guy gives his son a painting to avoid estate tax, but painting stays at fathers house (life estate to father), series of letters about what the gift actually is for tax/legal purposes Ct: this is ok, delivery was constructive and acceptance is assumed Concepts: inter vivos gift * evaluated differently that gift causa mortis

Answer 15

Co-owner cousins; one says she has been obstructed from using the land; asks for share of rent Ct: this is ouster, each cotenant has full use of land, but can’t keep other cotenants from using the land. Need clear, unequivocal demand to use land that is in the exclusive possession of another cotenant Concepts: co-ownership, ouster,

Answer 16

Joint tenancy with right of survivorship; one of the people takes out a mortgage on his part, promptly dies Ct: the mortgage did not end the JTWRS, mortgage does not survive the death and it disappears, the people who held mortgage get nothing (court doesn’t apply strict reading of the 4 unities) Concepts: JTWRoS,

Answer 17

Man kills his wife, wife’s will named a charity as sole beneficiary, can the charity get the real property owned by the decedent and her husband Ct: murderer cannot acquire right of survivorship, cancer fund is entitled to equity to an absolute one-half interest and a remainder interest in the other half, murderer only gets a life estate (ct assumes that without the murder she would have outlived him) this is an equitable remedy

Answer 18

Early landlord tenants rights case, invading prince of Germany meant guy couldn’t benefit from the land he leased. Ct: no “implied covenants” tenant still has to pay; only thing promised was “quiet enjoyment” so L has to give possession to T and landlord can’t disturb T (other people not acting with rights derived from the landlord can disturb T)

Answer 19

Rented land to graze cattle, all the land was covered in poisonous paint bits, cows died Ct: no implied warranty as to condition of realty; only implied warranty that a furnished apartment will come actually furnished

Answer 20

Landlord to residences first, then rents to a lounge on the first floor, tenants say this takes away “quiet enjoyment” Ct: right to quiet enjoyment so this is constructive eviction because landlord could stop renting to the lounge

Answer 21

Apartment building had lots of housing code violations, is this constructive eviction? Ct: yes, warranty of habitability, tenants aren’t paying for the land anymore they are paying for somewhere to live

Answer 22

Rented for resturant, not supposed to be renovations, there were renovations, landlord peeks in window, landlord changes locks Ct: doesn’t like self help, lockout was non-peaceable so can’t do that, tenant didn’t abandon property

Answer 23

Repo a car from a woman who comes out and yells but isn’t violent Ct: overturns jury verdict says the repo was ok, because statute rewards aggressive defense of personal property

Answer 24

Landlord was told tenant wouldn’t come back, didn’t try to relet Ct: landlord is under a duty to mitigate damages Opposing argument— keeping open for tenant, lost volume sales

Answer 25

LaMar Kay embezzled money from LDS church, got two cars, gave one to his girlfriend. Church tries to get it back Ct: church gets the cars because Vickie wasn’t actually a purchaser, relaxed tracing because we can follow enough of the funds, constructive trust created in equity Concepts: bona fide purchaser, tracing *not sure what this constructive trust thing actually means

Answer 26

Stole 9 $1,000 bills and 18 $500 bills, took to bank and exchanged for smaller denominations Berrys brought suit to recover the individual bills that had been stolen (idea that they were no longer printed and becoming collectible) Ct: this was still legal tender so money rule applies and they can’t recover the bills or the value

Answer 27

Plaintiff claims neighbor was committing a nuisance by using his land for making bricks Nuisance exists, its hard to define, this court ordered monetary damages instead of an abatement because making bricks is important

Answer 28

Farmers near a coal plant, alleged sulphur gases were killing their crops Ct: Don’t need negligence for nuisance, found nuisance

Answer 29

Plaintiffs lived near feedlot, fumes, swarms of insects, and water pollution Ct: economic utility in calculating damages/ injunction

Answer 30

Apartment building near a stable as “neighborhood was changing” Ct: the come to the nuisance defense would typically work, but here the stable cannot continue to operate even as the neighborhood changes

Answer 31

Ct: coming to the nuisance isn’t a defense because the nuisance is so offensive (verges on public nuisance)

Answer 32

Half of town residents depended on cement manufacturing plant for jobs Ct: the cement dust is a nuisance, but we won’t make them stop or make them pay you because they do so much for our community

Answer 33

The church bells case Ct: this is an eggshell plaintiff, nuisance looks at objectively offensive or offensive to the community

Answer 34

Racehorse track and drive in movie theater built next to each other Ct: doing of something not in itself noxious does not become a nuisance merely because it impacts a specific industry

Answer 35

The music teacher one Ct: upset because spite, told them to stop being spiteful, music generally isn’t a nuisance

Answer 36

Spite fence Ct: “no one should be compelled by law to submit to a nuisance created and continued for no useful end, but solely to inflict upon him humiliation, as well as physical pain”

Answer 37

D owned copper mines in Ducktown, farms nearby mountains Ct: no abatement because even though nuisance, balance annoyance to P with utility of D’s actions to community. The mines were important so no injunction, D gets damages

Answer 38

Cement plant nuisance Ct: no injunction have to pay damages, but if stop paying damages then injunction

Answer 39

Senior retirement community near feed lot Ct: no nuisance if only him but subsequent development means changing community; injunction you have to move, but also have to get support from Del Webb to move

Answer 40

Properties with no road access, (lake, bluff and other property, property) request easement by necessity because landlocked. Ct: no easement because originally had access to public road above the bluff and they sold that off

Answer 41

Action to establish easement by prescription Ct says— no prescription because plaintiffs because a little bit of permission But there is estoppel because there was some level of permission and the plaintiffs relied on it, court also recognizes there is some necessity here

Answer 42

The trucks crossing onto another parcel to turn around Is there an easement— yes prescriptive easement because open, notorious, continuous use Does the Dominant estate have to pay?- not for the easement (dissent says this is getting something for nothing), not to keep them from building something on the easement because the easement conveys right to continued use without interference

Answer 43

Hotel is building tall building, nearby hotel is upset Ct says no nuisance because no legal right to air and light (this is called doctrine of ancient lights), sic utere tuo it alienum non lead as (no one has right to use property to injure LAWFUL rights of another) but no lawful right to air and light

Answer 44

Property A gave express easement to property B for ingress to and egress from B B was sold to X X owned B and C which is past B X tore down home on B and started building on property line between B and C Ct: This is a technical violation because the use on C is misuse/extension But there is no damage, so only get 1$ in nominal for trespass, do not get an injunction to keep them from using C (C does not have easement, but dissent says they can go get condemnation action for being landlocked)

Answer 45

There was an easement by necessity, but not used for 170 years When does easement by necessity end? Ct says: need: No longer landlocked OR No use and abandonment (intentionally relinquished known right- acts inconsistent with right) (estoppel can help find abandonment knows and sits back and waits after servient estate acts to block easement/ property right)

Answer 46

HOA fees tied to land, covenant said “these covenants shall run with the land, and shall be construed as real covenants running with the land until Jan 31 1940,” covenant intended to maintain streets Ct says Have privity, money was being used for public goods that touch and concern land, so covenant is good

Answer 47

Leinster square sold with condition that it be kept free of buildings so it could be a public space, 40 years later guy try’s to build on it Ct: Not a legal covenant because no privity and didn’t run with land But is an equitable servitude because the party had notice

Answer 48

Wanted to build a gas station in backyard Ct: Finds reciprocal negative easement against “Use so detrimental” to enjoyment of the neighbors, but deed dropped this language Ct says you know all the houses look the same so there is notice for a covenant

Answer 49

Has land with restrictive covenant to single family home But area has changed and want to do commercial, and on corner of non residential street Ct says Best use of property, the covenant is obsolete as to this property Dissent They had a covenant and everyone agreed, the convenient should survive, best use is a dumb argument because most properties are most valuable as commercial property

Answer 50

SC said can’t prevent people from contracting, but the court can’t enforce a racial covenant under equal protection clause

Answer 51

Rhue wanted to move a 30 year old Spanish style house into a new subdivision, which contained only modern ranch style or split level homes. Never got it approved by the architectural board Ct: - upheld the covenant even if it wasn’t explicit

Answer 52

Cat owner wanted to end a covenant because she wasn’t allowed to have cats. No nuisance Ct: - covenant is fine because we can contract for this - “legitimate desires of the covenanting parties” (good faith) Dissent: - cats and music are the only two things that are good in the world, don’t take them Legislature: - said can’t have covenant that keeps you from having “at least one cat”

Answer 53

Lower court. Euclid zoning by category Lower Ct says: Ordinance is void because this looks more like unconstitutional taking if some property stick. Acres of undeveloped land is in a “straight jacket”

Answer 54

SC says zoning is fine. Zoning is only unconstitutional when clearly arbitrary and unreasonable (no substantial relation to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare)

Answer 55

Developer planned 23 story building near smaller developments. Near Rice University Homeowners want injunction or money for prospective nuisance Ct: Yes on possibility of injunction but no injunction here (my case notes conflict with my class notes, so?) No to damages for prospective nuisance

Answer 56

Eminent domain case for “public use.” Gov wanted to take land for economic development with the intention of giving to Pfizer Homeowners were holdouts Ct: Economic development is a “public use” as required by fifth amendment So can take as long as compensation Thomas and O’Connor are not fans

Answer 57

Guy buys a house over a coal deposit (doesn’t buy subsurface— so coal company can dig out coal) Then Penn legislature makes it illegal to dig out coal from beneath a home Ct: This reaches a regulatory taking: - reciprocity of advantage and - diminished value Gov has to pay if they want to do this and it must be for a “public use”

Answer 58

Penn Station is a historic building, owner wants to make a big skyscraper over it. Historic buildings commission says no ``` Ct: This is not a taking: - economic impact - amount of interference and income potential if no regulation - character of government act ``` (Its unsaid, but also looks more like a taking if they are preventing you from doing something you are already doing vs. preventing you from doing something in the future) Rehnquist Dissent: This is a taking

Cases Flashcards

(82 cards)