REAL COVENANTS (promises relating to land) Flashcards
(39 cards)
Issue(s)
Gallagher v. Bell
Are these promises real covenants?
Does the conveyance of the land that is subject to the real covenant DISCHARGE the original promisor?
When do you know that you have a real covenant?
The promise must RUN w/the land
What does run w/the land mean/require?
MUST HAVES
1) must Touch & Concern the land
2) be entered w/the INTENT that the promise will run w/the land
3) be entered and enforced by parties w/ the appropriated “Privity of esate”
If missing any of the 3 requirements of running w/the land then what do we have?
a personal contract, which means only orig. parties are bound.
what is a restrictive covenant?
another word for Real Covenant
how do we know if it “touches & concerns the land?” (powell & Bigelow’s view)
1) if the covenanter’s estate is rendered less valuable because of the promise, the BURDEN RUNS W/LAND
2) if the covenantee’s estate is rendered more valuable because of the promise, the BENEFIT RUNS W/LAND
Touches & Concerning- Restatement View
requires that the promise be:
-of BENEFIT to the use or enjoyment of the land
(much broader view then P& B)
Covenantor/Promisors estate less valuable
P&B
lowered market value
ex) promise is person has to paint fend . NO one wants to buy land that having to paint is a requirement. :(
Covenantee’s interest enhanced (P&B)
the party that got the fence, property value hasn’t gone down
which view do most jurisdictions like
restatement
Why don’t we like promises unless they “run w/land”
it’s like feudal law all over again. NON-connected promises render land worthless. (w.out touch & concern requirement, people would go after too many promises)
(dowry, knighthood obligations)
run w/land = ___ __ ____
touch & concern
INTENT
parties must have INTENDED the promise to run w/the land for it to be a real covenant
Intent is a question of _____?
FACT
most typically—will be clearly expressed in deed. “this covenant shall runw/land”
Privity, english rule?
MUTUAL PRIVITY
mutual privity?
the original parties had a continuing interest in the same land
interests w/ mutual privity
-Possessory Estates & assoc. future interests
-landlord/tenant; tenancy,reversion
-cotenants (any variety)
-
Privity, Minority American rule
Horizontal Privity
Horizontal Privity
the original parties were grantor and grantee on the deed that contained the promise
why does horizontal privity have to be a grantor/grantee relationship?
as the promise is created at the time the deed was created
3 factors to look at w/Horizontal Privity
ALL TOGETHER
1) a conveyance
2) simultaneous w/ creation of promise
3) Same deed
Privity, Majority American Rule
Vertical Privity
Vertical privity
the enforcement parties are successors in interest to the original contracting parties –no specific relationship is needed between the original contracting parties
Are you a party that enters promise or did you acquire title form someone who did?
if you acquired title from someone who did then it’s vertical privity
(successor in interest or assignee)