The Concept of Property Flashcards
What was the holding of Pierson v Post?
Pursuit alone does not grant property rights, even when accompanied with wounding, unless the animal is taken.
Allowing this to count as possession would be a basis for many future disagreements .
What are the theories behind why we protect property rights?
First Possession, Reward Labor, Maximize Social Happiness, Ensure Democracy, Facilitating Personal Development
What is the right of publicity?
The right of publicity is an intellectual property right that protects against the misappropriation of a person’s name, likeness, or other indicia of personal identity—such as nickname, pseudonym, voice, signature, likeness, or photograph—for commercial benefit.
What did the court hold in the Vanna White case regarding her right to publicity?
The court held that viewed together the dress, took of the robot, and the game board all suggest that it is the likeness of Vanna White
Why did the dissent believe that the court was overprotecting IP in the Vanna White case?
Under this opinion it becomes a tort for advertisers to remind the public of a celebrity, Invoking the image in the public’s mind. It gives White and exclusive right not in what she looks like or who she is, but in what she does for a living.
What rule was established in Johnson v McIntosh?
The plaintiffs do not have the right of transfer because the rules of property must be drawn from and decided by the nation in which the property which is the subject matter of the lawsuit lies. Title did not belong to the Native tribes who the plaintiffs got the land from it belongs to the US who claimed it through European explanation and discovery
What did the court hold regarding the right of possession in Moore v Regent’s of California?
To establish a tort of conversion, plaintiff must establish an actual interference with his ownership or right of possession… Where plaintiff neither has title to the property alleged to has been converted, nor possession thereof, he cannot maintain an action for conversion. Moore did not expect to retain possession of his cells
No judicial decision supports his claim
Statutory law drastically limits any continuing interest in excised cells.
What rule is established in Stenberg homes?
When nominal damages are awarded for intentional trespass to land punitive damages can be awarded at the discretion of the jury. In the loss of an individual’s right to exclude others from their property a punitive damage award can be awarded.
What is the rationale for allowing punitive damages for intentional trespass to land?
The US Supreme Court has previously recognized the right to exclude others from private property Because a legal right is involved, actual harm always occurs when there is a trespass to land. Nominal damages are a recognition that actual harm occurred.
The repeated conduct of an intentional trespasser could also ripen prescription or adverse possession, leading a landowner to lose property rights to the trespasser.
Society also has an interest in punishing and deterring intentional trespass beyond just an individual landowner
By protecting the right to exclude, private landowners are less likely to resort to self-help remedies (prevents dueling) .
Without punitive damages, nominal damages are not enough of a deterrent.
What is the court’s decision regarding the right to exclude in the Shack case?
A man’s response to property is not absolute and you cannot use your right to property to injure the rights of others
Private or public necessity may justify entry upon the lands of another
A farmer cannot assert a right to isolate the migrant worker in any respect significant for the worker’s well being. Workers must be allowed to have visitors and association
What is the right to use?
Traditionally owner has the right to use their property if it is in a manner that does not injure another person’s property
What is the principal limitation of the right to use?
Nuisance. To be successful in a private nuisance lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove three private nuisance elements: 1. The plaintiff owns the property.
2. The defendant acted in a way that interfered or disturbed the plaintiff’s use or enjoyment of the property.
3. The act was unreasonable
What is the Spite Fence Doctrine?
A landowner cannot erect an unusually high fence along his property line for the purpose of annoying his neighbor. Proving a spite fence case requires showing the defendant acted out of malice.
(Sundowner Inc v. King)
What is the court’s decision in Pruh v Mareti?
The court determined that the plaintiff established a common law case for nuisance because the location of the defendant’s house interfered with his right to access sunlight for his solar panel.
Court bases this decision on some public policy considerations.
- Society has increasingly regulated the use of land by the landowner for the general welfare
- Access to sunlight has taken on new significance (it is now used as an energy source)
- The need for rapid development is not as great as it once was
How does the court limit Eyerman’s right to destroy her property?
The court determines that Kingsbury place should not be razed even though it is in Ms. Eyerman’s will because it would have a negative effect on public policy.
- Razing the home would lead o a total loss of 39,350
- Razing the home will depreciate adjoining property values by an estimated 10K
- The home has been declared a landmark
- Destruction of the house detrimentally harms neighbors and the communities
- Destroying it will increase the likelihood the lot will be subject to uses detrimental to the health, safety and beauty of the neighborhood
-
