1Cora owns adjacent properties, Blackacre and Whiteacre. In 2010, she conveyed Blackacre to her son, Devin. She included an easement over Whiteacre in the deed so that Devin could easily reach the main road. In 2012, Devin sold Blackacre to Edie. His deed conveying Blackacre to Edie did not mention the easement over Whiteacre and she did not attempt to use it. In 2014, Edie conveyed Blackacre back to Cora. Again, there was no mention of the easement in the deed. In 2016, Cora conveyed Blackacre to Fagin but did not include the easement in the deed. Fagin wants to use the easement which he discovered in the title search. All of the deeds above were properly recorded. Cora claims the easement is no longer valid. Who wins?
Cora, because the easement ended in 2014, due to merger
2Developer owned three lots in a commercial shopping district. She conveyed the middle lot, Lot B, to Pin Me, Inc., which used the lot for a bowling alley. She also conveyed to Pin Me an access easement over Lot A, which was adjacent to the main road. She then conveyed Lot A to a fast food restaurant, QuickEats. She conveyed Lot C to an accountant, Dew Books, who had access through an alley on the other side. Many years later, business was booming for Pin Me. It bought Lot C from Dew Books and planned to expand the bowling alley building by constructing a snack bar on the newly acquired lot. QuickEats sues to enjoin the use of the easement for the expansion, claiming that the proposed construction will result in a misuse of the easement over Lot A. Pin Me thinks QuickEats is trying to prevent a competing food business. Which of the following is true in most jurisdictions?
Even though the expansion is a misuse of the easement, an injunction may not be the appropriate remedy if there is no additional burden on the servient parcel.
3In 1990, Albert owned Whiteacre and Bertil owned the adjacent land, Blackacre. Albert granted Bertil an easement over Whiteacre "for the purpose of mining a gravel pit on Blackacre." The easement was properly recorded. From 2000 to 2015, Bertil made sporadic use of the easement as the gravel pit gradually became less profitable. Grass grew over the dirt track and was hardly visible by 2010. In 2010, Albert conveyed Whiteacre to Candace but did not mention the easement, either orally or in the deed. By 2017, Bertil had not used the easement for many years. Bertil told several people that once the price of gravel increases, he may go back to using the property for mining. In 2017, he filled the pit with water and began to rent it out to groups for camping and watersports activities. The use of the easement therefore increased significantly. Candace has now sued Bertil to enjoin his use of the easement. Which of the following is most likely the outcome of this case?
The court will enjoin Bertil's use of the easement for a new purpose.
4Abdul owned Blackacre, a 40-acre tract of land in an agricultural area, adjacent to Whiteacre which is owned by his good friend Nguyen. For many years, Abdul has allowed Nguyen to cross Blackacre with his cattle and farm equipment to reach another field Nguyen owns on the other side of Blackacre called Greenacre. Abdul is now getting ready to sell Blackacre to Betsy and wants to be sure that Nguyen will be able to continue to use the right of way. Which of the following would be the worst way for Abdul to accomplish this?
Abdul could deed Blackacre to Betsy "subject to an easement in favor of Nguyen for ingress and egress."
5Olivia owned a tract of land bordered on the north by Green Road and on the south by Brown Road. In 1996, Olivia built a house on the north half of the property which she called Greenacre. To reach the house, she sometimes used the front driveway leading north out to Green Road, but after heavy snows or heavy rains, Green Road was accessible only with a four-wheel-drive vehicle. Therefore, she often used ''the back way''—a dirt track going over the southern half of the property, which she called Brownacre, leading to Brown Road. In 2006, Olivia sold Greenacre to Andrew and she built and moved into a house on Brownacre. Although the deed said nothing about an easement over Brownacre, Andrew frequently used the dirt track to reach Brown Road, which was a quicker way to reach his workplace. Olivia often saw him and would wave hello. In 2014, a mudslide closed Green Road, and county officials notified Andrew that the damage to the road was severe and might not be repaired for years. Thereafter, Andrew exclusively used the dirt track over Brownacre for ingress and egress. In 2016, Olivia sold Brownacre to Betsy. Soon thereafter, Betsy put up a locked gate across the dirt track and has forbidden Andrew to use it. In this jurisdiction, the statute of limitations for prescription is 10 years. Which of the following is Andrew's best theory for an easement over Brownacre?
Implied by Prior Use
6Testa died in 2000 leaving a vacant lot called Brownacre to her two children, Allie and Bart. Bart, who was a drug dealer, had not been heard from in many years, and Allie believed he was probably dead. In any case, she took possession of Brownacre and in 2009 sold the lot to Carlos Construction Company for \$80,000. She told Carlos that Bart had not been heard from for a while, and she had, in any event, fulfilled the jurisdiction's seven-year statute for adverse possession. She gave Carlos a general warranty deed. Carlos built a house on Brownacre, increasing the value of the property. In 2012, Carlos sold Brownacre to Dora for \$500,000 by special warranty deed. In 2015, Bart showed up, claiming a half-interest in Brownacre. It turned out that he had been in prison for 20 years. The court ruled that the statute of limitations for adverse possession was tolled by the disability provision of the statute, and, therefore, Bart was entitled to a half-interest in Brownacre. Bart has agreed to accept \$150,000 to release his interest to Dora. Dora wants to sue Allie to recover the \$150,000 plus court costs. Which of the following is true in most jurisdictions?
Dora should be able to recover the \$80,000 from Allie.
7Alf wants his daughter Becky to have Blackacre when he dies. He drafts a deed to Blackacre which says that "Alf hereby grants Blackacre to Becky, her heirs, and assigns forever." On her birthday, he shows her the deed and tells her it will be in a drawer in his desk with his will which gives all of his property to the Odd Fellows, a charitable organization. When Alf dies, his executor finds the deed and gives it to Becky, who promptly records it. Does Becky own Blackacre?
No, because he deed was not delivered effectively.
8Sayers enters into a contract to sell Blackacre, an 80-acre parcel in a rural area, to Byers. The contract says that Sayers will provide "marketable title, subject to all easements and encumbrances of record to Blackacre, legally described as W1/2 SE1/4 Section 16 in Guthrie County." Upon examining the title, Byers discovers that Blackacre is encumbered by a gas pipeline easement. In addition, it appears that Sayers does not have record title to about five acres of land (Parcel A) on the edge of the property described in the contract. Sayers shows Byers evidence, however, that he has been in continual, exclusive possession of Parcel A for over 20 years. Given that the adverse possession period in the state is only seven years, Sayers says that he has established good title to Parcel A. Byers refuses to close, alleging a failure of marketable title. Which of the following is true?
The easement does not violate the contract's marketable title provision; the Parcel A issue does.
9Betty Buyer bought a house in from Sally Seller, taking title by general warranty deed. The jurisdiction has no statutory disclosure requirements regarding the condition of the premises. Buyer inspected the property before closing but found nothing wrong. Shortly after moving in, however, she began to feel ill. After a few months, she discovered that there was mold growth behind the paneling in the living room. Seller had put up the paneling shortly before selling the property and admits she saw some mold at the time. Buyer received an estimate of \$20,000 to fix the problem. Buyer now wants to recover that amount in damages from Seller. Which of the following is true?
Buyer can recover damages, because the defect was not discoverable by reasonable inspection.
10Kaya leases a loft apartment in downtown Arcadia City to law student Cliff for a term of three years at a monthly rent of \$2,500. One year later, after he receives a clerkship out-of-state, Cliff "subleases, transfers, and assigns" the property to his classmate Thomas for "a period of one year from today's date." Thereafter, neither Thomas nor Cliff pays rent to Kaya. Does Kaya have any rights against Cliff?
Yes, Kaya has rights against Cliff because the transfer to Thomas is a sublease, and Thomas has not paid rent.