Property cases

Question 1

Prah v. Maretti:

Answer 1

guy has solar heater on his house, private Nuisance. Issue? Issue was is the private nuisance doctrine applicable in this case for solar energy and the use of his home. 2. this case had seek injunctive relief, which has a higher standard of proof.

Question 2

understanding the difference between Sundowner v. king from Prah v. Maretti

Answer 2

• understand that private nuisance is a different cause of action and spike fence. - There are similarities between spite fence and private nuisance. But there’s differences spite fence requires a subjective intent, whereas private nuisance only requires intent not specific intent - In both cases, they talk about sunlight. I wouldn’t go so far as to say there’s an ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO SUNLIGHT that would actually create chaos in cities where this law is still evolving, but it does have does give weight to we’re moving towards having more rights to sunlight,

Question 3

Eyerman vs. Mercantile Trust

Answer 3

THIS IS A PRIVATE NUISANCE CASE: The issue is this lady’s WILL directed the demolition or her home, that So basically, fighting over whether the executor of the WILL can go through with that or not.

Question 4

Eyerman vs. Mercantile Trust PART II why is this case in the book.

Answer 4

• The court recognized the right to a private nuisance action when someone threatens to destroy. - This case is in this book because it’s an expansion of private nuisance that it establishes the destroying something can be a private nuisance. - Just like the way creating something like a house that causes a shadow can cause private nuisance.

Question 5

Eyerman vs. Mercantile Trust Part III the Dissent, why is the dissent important?

Answer 5

Why is the dissent important to this case? What did they say, what is the descent feel about the public policy argument of the majority? - he particularly finds problems with the public policy argument - the dissenting judge brings up that it would cause questionable legal precedent. Like, you can’t prove that the like. If alive she could just have her house torn down. No problem. So what’s the difference when she’s dead. - the dissent also finds that this public policy is wispy and ill defined. - The court failed to stick with the fact that what the plaintiffs brought is not discussed

Question 6

State v. Shaw

Answer 6

What is the issue? whether the owner of the nets controlled the right to the fish.

Question 7

State v. Shaw part II, what are the differences in this case

Answer 7

The fish must be controlled, but it doesn’t say certain control, they must maintain control. Therefore, they don’t need that absolute possession. You want to think about the type of animal when you’re thinking about how to apply the rule of capture different animals different rules. it introduces the degrees of control. In pierson for a fox. You need certain control and in Shaw they just say control and they can’t escape. Pierson requires more in order to capture the animal than shaw.

Question 8

state v shaw. Part III what where the standards of review

Answer 8

1. Pierson was a case of first impression. There was no statutory law. 2. Shaw- is a case of statutory analysis, they’re looking at the larceny law and seeing how larceny applies in this situation. So they had very different standards of review.

Question 9

Armory v.Delamirie chimeny case

Answer 9

The finder of lost property has more rights to the property than anyone except the rightful owner

does not have title (entire bundle fo sticks)

Question 10

Law uses title in two different ways.

Answer 10

1. indication of actual ownership
2. or Title as the entire bundle

title is relative, not absolute. You can split the paper title from possession (think gruen)

Question 11

timeframe of finders

Answer 11

1. Common law -The rightful owner always has greater rights than any subsequent possessor.
2. Statutory law: timeframe based on jurisdiction.

Question 12

Hannah v. Peel what is the issue?

broach in the window sill

Answer 12

Peel held title to the land but never moved in! this was key in the decision.

What is the issue? does the finder of loss chattel on another one another’s property have rights to that chattel superior to the rights of the property owner? Or

does hannah I have the right to property found on his land where There were people has title, but not possession.

Question 13

look at how professor runs through hannah v. peel

your are trying to distinguish when the law of capture is applicable and when you would apply finders law!

Answer 13

If it’s lost the owner would unintentionally in voluntarily part with it. The court calls it lost. What we are going to break down is why they call it .

mislaid owner voluntarily and knowing places somewhere that unintentionally forgets it, it’s in a crevice above a window so it makes sense to put it in mislaid but the Court does not find that it is mislaid they find it is lost.

abandoned the owner gives up. All right, title and interest to the property. But is it possible, somebody abandoned the broach it was left so long. It was covered in dust and cobwebs. There is a really strong case to be made for abandoned.

The only category that we don’t have evidence for is the one that the Court uses, this is a reference to Hannah V. peel

Question 14

hannah v peel - why was the property catorgorized as lost

Answer 14

peel did what he should, in the course of any employment, because if you find something in the course of employment, it belongs to your employer, not you (that is if there is not better owner)

Question 15

tips for the exam on finders from professor

Answer 15

Usually only prima facia cases but we will see these precedent cases again for finders

On an exam discuss what category that the item belongs in whether it is lost mislaid or abandoned.

·nd realize that it’s incredibly rare that it’s going to be clear cut. So, almost. Almost always, you’re going to want to talk about at least two and maybe all three categories.

So you’re going to want to distinguish “I am choosing this item as falling into lost (mislaid or abandoned) because” and explain all the facts that tell you that it is more like

here are all the factors that explain lost (mislaid or abandoned), which category and why. (public or private, you need to determine

YOU MUCH DISCUSS THE ROLE OF THE FINDER)

if you’re in a weird place realized that the law is constantly evolving. So when we get to finders the law has evolved to decide. There are places that are private but have public spaces and those are different than public or private

· 01:25:07discussed how the space that you’re talking about on the exam falls into one category better than the other. Don’t get flustered by the ambiguity.

think about:

Valuable baseball nothing like manure

What does this add to our understanding of how to categorize property?

Type of property can change from where it is found

A baseball can be worth something if caught in stadium vs found in a park!

Think about car parts on the side of the road, vs car parts

State of property matters a lot, a brand new car is nothing like my old toyota

Question 16

if you are a guest

Answer 16

You do not own anything that is on that private property because you are invited

Question 17

Finders:

what degree of control did the owner exhibit over the land?

need to think how you will use this in your answer.

how do these cases link to Hanah v. peel

keep in mind that our finders law are much different from international, due to customs.

Answer 17

1. Bridges v. hawkesworth (wallet on the ground in shop). the shopowner owned the shop but i was a public place. in fact that the shop owner did not have _exclusive contro_l is very important. It is the precedent that guides the holding in Hannah V. Peel
2. South Staffordshire Water Co V. Sharman (employee finds rings on someones land that they are working for) different from bridges v. hawkesworth. It’s an employee. BUT the land was controlled by the owner of the land
3. Elwes v. briggs gas co- this was a contractual issue, the find went beyond the scope of the contract and therefore went to the owener in control of the land_._

4. Mcavoy v. Medina (barber shop, pocketbook on table) THIS IS A CASE OF FIRST IMPRESSION. it differs from Bridges because the pocketbook is found in the barber cuting area and is classified as mislaid, goes to the owener of the barber shop.

Question 18

Mcavoy v. Medina (barber shop, pocketbook on table)

Answer 18

this is a case of first impression

• Note: this case has the same facts as bridges case cited in Hannah, but a different outcome, do not confuse the two cases

case of first impression, which will differentiate mislaid property from found property

the barber had exclusive control of this area

Question 19

McAvoy v. Medina: pocketbook at the barber

Answer 19

this is the case of first impression, which will differetniate mislaid property from found property
Mislaid Property

Issue? The issue is: can a voluntarily placed object (mislaid property) in a public place inside of a store be claimed by a customer who first find it ( first in time)

The plaintiff acquired no original rights to the property and the defendants subsequent acts in receiving and holding the property in the manner he did does not create any (rights)

Question 20

Haslem v. Lockwood: horse manure

Answer 20

The issues : do someone lose their rights to abandoded property if left unattended

Labor in this case was beneficial to society

Question 21

Benjamin v. Lindner Aviation _{plane cash}

Answer 21

The issues is: when property is found and its category is unclear what are the finders rights?

The supreme court court re-catagorized the property to mislaid and took away the finders fee and he got nothing .

mislaid property goes to the owner of the premises, where it was found (in this case the plane), rather than the founder of the property because it does seem that the true owner may eventually recall, where he has placed the property and return there to claim it.

Question 22

Benjamin v. Linder aviation

DISSENT

Answer 22

Dissent relies on a policy justification, this was most likely abandoned property and you will discourage people from doing the right thing. If you don’t want to get trace by that jug money isn’t the, in a way, abandoning it

Question 23

Gruen v. Gruen

Answer 23

What is the issue? Can in inter vivos gift exist if donee never had possession of it,

Element by element:

1. Donative intent -
2. Delivery- the father through the letters delivered the title to the son. THIS DELIVERY WAS SYMBOLIC
3. Acceptance- the son talking about the gift to friends ext confirmed acceptance. Plus acceptance is assumed in this case

Question 24

Gruen v. Gruen II

Answer 24

The correct test; “whether the make (gifter) intended the gift to have no effect until after the maker’s death , or whether he intended it to transfer ‘some present interest.’” If evidence establishes intent to make a present and irrevocable transfer of title or the right of ownership, there is a present transfer of some interest and the gift is effective immediately.

Question 25

Albinger v. Harris ednagement ring/volitle relationship

Answer 25

Issue? This issue is can a plaintiff under Montana law recover and engagement ring as part of a failed contractual agreement to marriage Look for statute, then determine fault or no-fault system.

Question 27

Brind v. International Trust (gift Causa Morits)

Answer 27

case of Replevin? Claiming to a right to personal property (they want the item back), remember trover was the replacement value of the property. It has to meet all of the elements of interview both gift, but it must be made in contemplation of or peril of death, the donor must die of that specific peril. Causa Mortis= revocable if the condition death by peril is not met. It's also revocable anytime up to death

Question 28

Neithamer v. Brenneman Property FHA prima facia case

Answer 28

Why Is this Case Important: This is a Prima Facia case for FHA discrimination claims, before this, they weren't using this threshold or this test to get people into court How about the “familial status”? **my lover passed of HIV.** was HIV P and that **constitutes a handicap** under FHA. He's protected under the **_perceived_ as has disability**. What that means is you don't have to have the disability but if other people around you **perceive you is having that disability** and that leads to discrimination that's good enough. case settled out of court

Question 29

Fair Hous. Coun. Of SF Valley v. Roommate.com

Answer 29

How does FHA define “dwelling”? as any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as a residence by one or more roomates. **The issue** is does FHA extend to shared living situations (such as roommates) It makes sense to interpret a dwelling as an **independent living unit and stop the FHA at the front door**. Anything more narrow would raise **constitutional concerns.** In this case Kazinski looks at the intent and says now way would congress all this to apply to roommates. Rationale? Because the FHA can reasonably be read either to include or exclude shared living arrangements, we can in must choose the construction that avoids raising constitutional concerns ... Reading a “dwelling” too mean an independent housing unit is a fear interpretation of the text inconsistent with congressional intent. **Rationale** the Supreme Court has already recognized the freedom to carry on certain intimate or private relationships as a fundamental element of liberty. And so the right to associate also implies the right not to associate

Question 30

Effel v. Rosberg life estate turned into tenancy at will

Answer 30

Issue: this issue is: can a lease for the term to the lessee’s life (uncertain period of time) be considered a tenant at will arrangement. Note: They put it in the wrong recording. They put it in a lease when it needed to be in the deed. **Let’s walk through the recordings and the terms**… The court looked at What is in the settlement (which states life estate for the Effel aunt. The looked at the dead, which did not reserve the life estate for the Effel Aunt and needed to. Then they looked at the lease which reserved the life estate for the aunt. But by doing this they actually made the lease a tenancy at will and she was evicted.

Question 31

Statute of Frauds: what needs to be in writing

Answer 31

Leases longer than 1 year need to be in writing. Need to be signed by the “party to be charged” (the party to be charged and Elise is both parties.)

Question 32

Standard forms:

Answer 32

They limit negotiations between parties. It's incredibly difficult to negotiate a lease if they're using a standard form, and you're not leasing from an individual

Question 33

Rent control:

Answer 33

Statutory limits on how much rent LL can charge Growing out of favor in the united states.

Question 34

Keydata vs. United States NASA, keydata and wthe wyman corp

Answer 34

**do not use key data inappropriately on an exam understand this is a case dealing with commercial leases _not residential leases._** Wyman subrogation its Privity of Estate right and give it over to keydata to sue NASA for government contracts: in the United States. We are going to apply the English rule everywhere,

Question 35

In re Clark

Answer 35

What is the issue: At what point does a landlord have a warranty of habitability. indicative of the tenant revolution of the 1960s pre 1960s. Horrific conditions today it would depend on the terms of the lease, You cannot have a residential property that violates the state statutes for habitable housing. there are local housing codes and there are state housing codes, implied warranty of habitability, you want to check both. They are also state specific because conditions. Very around the country. So it is a violation of the housing code in North Carolina to not have operating air conditioning in the summer.

Question 37

Fidelity Mutual Life v. Kaminsky commercial lease for a doctor's SUBSTANTIAL INTERFERENCE

Answer 37

whether Dr. Kaminsky had a case for constructive eviction against fidelity. ## Footnote Who actually interfered with Dr. Kaminsky’s use of the property? They were ANTI ABORTION protesters. They were protesting outside and then eventually they actually were protesting inside the atrium building. How does this qualify as “**substantial” interferes?** importance goes to substantiality if it is for a limited amount of time it has to be a very important part of the business or a very important part of life. The abortions were a small part of his business, but it was what drove clients to him. The substantiality was the importance of the Act to his Business. it's a sliding scale if it happens all the time, then it's something that doesn't need to be huge. The offense is something that happens for a **limited amount of time**, then it has to be really important.

Question 38

Fidelity Mutual Life v. Kaminsky WHAT DID FIDLEIDY LIFE DO TO LOSE THIS CASE?

Answer 38

Any overt act or omission any overt act or omission. So landlord failing to do something is as important for constructive eviction as a landlord doing something actively wrong

Question 40

JMB Properties Urban Co v. Paolucci jeweler constructive eviction, goldilocks issue

Answer 40

_The substantiality ties into the reasonableness and the fourth element_ if it was so bad that he couldn't perform what he was supposed to be performing as a jeweler. the **tenant bears the burden of proving that he did abandon within a reasonable amount of time**

Question 41

Rogers v. conditt, go-kart track So what is the holding, Is this an assignment or is this a sublease?

Answer 41

is the transfer from Rogers to conditt, an assignment or a sublease you could have added facts and says insight. ## Footnote **This was an assignment**. **because it was for the duration of the entire contract.** In other words, T one was not coming back. Case. So despite the language of the actual lease saying sublease they find that there was no reservation made to Rogers.

Question 42

Kendall v. Pestana Majority rule v Minority rule missing terms in lease

Answer 42

I**n the absence of a standard in a lease** , The **MAJORITY** says that. Yes. In fact, the lessor or the landlord **can apply an arbitrary standard:** he can say _I am not going to transfer this least because I don't like people with red hair._ The MINORITY rule is that the lessor may only use commercially reasonable standards to deny a transfer pestana was acting outside of a duty of good faith and fair dealing

Question 43

3 Types of Clauses (Read the least terms very carefully)

Answer 43

1. **Sole Discretion clause:** Landlord may refuse to consent to a transfer and assignment or sublease for any reason at their sole discretion 2. **reasonableness clause**, the landlord may refuse to consent for a commercially reasonable reason also all good. 3. **No standard in lease** (called **Silent consent** clause) means the only language in the lease is that the Landlord has the right to approve an assignment or sublease 1. **The majority default rule** is to say if there's no standard and lease its sole discretion (clause). 2. **The Minority rule (modern trend)** you move to a reasonableness clause and the landlord may only refuse consent for a commercially reasonable reason.

Question 44

**commercial clauses test tip!**

Answer 44

for example: -if Lease says tha**t sublease is are barred.** That does not mean that _assignments are barred_ _this was an example from professor: read carefully_

Question 45

Kendall v. Pestana the fight is between: property law and contact law.

Answer 45

CONCEPT #1; **property law** leaseholder **freely Alienable.** This is one of those bundle of sticks. _They want to be free to transfer of land (aka freely alienable)._ CONCEPT #2; In contrast to that c**ontract law** assumes everything in a contract has been bargained for. And you should never violate contract terms. The bargain for exchange has already settled everything between the parties, if there was something that should have been different_. It should have been bargained for at the beginning._

Question 46

kendall v. pestana test tip II!

Answer 46

_What is absolutely critical that you guys understand is that if a lease has what is called “a sole discretion clause”_ if it says that the landlord or lessor, or may withhold consent for any reason whatsoever. This is still good law,It's going to be withheld a bit going to be upheld by the court as a term of the lease. **Kendall is only when there's no standard in the lease at all**. (they used a gap filler, to fill this missing gap)

Question 47

Kendall V. Pestana a duty of good faith and fair dealing

Answer 47

implied in all contracts is that parties will not do anything to destroy the right of the other party from the fruits of the contract. pestana was acting outside of a duty of good faith and fair dealing. Summing that up the property rationale is that property law wants to enforce free alien ability, It's a fundamental concept of property law you want people to freely, be able to transfer their property.

Question 49

. Sommer v. Kridel (wedding off, guy never moved in, LL fails to mitigate)

Answer 49

a. old Majority rule: “ no duty to mitigate” (meaning LL does not need to fill theapartment if you leave early. (still the rule in massachusetts) b. New Rule: Landlord has a duty to mitigate damages when he seeks to recover rents due to a defaulting tenant” (reasonable efforts).

Question 50

. Hillview Asso. V. Bloomquist (retaliatory eviction mobile home park)

Answer 50

1. What is “retaliatory conduct” under the statute? LL cannot evict tenants for: Reporting housing code violations joining a tenant union or complaining about inhabitable conditions. 2. 6 month presumption: If the landlord fails to renew a lease, Evicts, raises rent or decreases services within 6 months of the complaint. Then there is the presumption of retaliatory eviction 3. If LL starts harassing tenants by failing to renew a lease, Evicts, raises rent or decreases services past the 6 month mark, this will remove the presumption. But it doesn't remove the case. It doesn't mean that it's not retaliatory eviction. It just means that the tenants just have to prove that it was retaliatory eviction.