easement flashcards

7/29/2019 Easement Flashcards

1/38

What is a right away?


2/38

An owner might grant to someone else the right to

pass over the owner's land, perhaps by allowing

her neighbor to use the owner's driveway to get to

a public road.


3/38

What are easements?


4/38

Rights to do specific acts on land owned by

someone else are called easements.


5/38

What is the difference

between easements and

licenses?


6/38

Easements differ from licenses because they areusually intend to be permanent, or at least to last

for a specified period, and thus are not revocable

at the will of the owner of the land over which the

easement passes.


7/38

During a leasehold is a

license irrevocable?


8/38

In the case of a leasehold, the license is

irrevocable during the course of the lease

unless the lease agreement (contract) is

breached by the tenant.


9/38

What is an affirmative

easement?


10/38

A right to do something on someone else's

land is usually created in the form ofan

affirmative easement(also called a positive"

easement).


11/38

What is an affirmative

covenant?


12/38

A duty to do something on your own land tobenefit other owners is usually created in the

form ofan affirmative covenant


13/38

What does run with the

land mean?


14/38

This means that the rights in someoneelse's land are attached to ownership of

another parcel; the servitude is appurtenant

to ownership of a dominant estate whose

owner benefits from the use of the servitude

on the servient estate.


15/38

What is the dominant

estate?


16/38

The parcel benefited by the easement


17/38

Are licenses revocable?


18/38

Licenses are generally revocable.


19/38

When are licenses

deemed irrevocable?


20/38

If the licensee invests substantially in reasonablereliance on the license, the courts may grant the

licensee an easement by estoppel.


21/38

HARD CASE

License v. EasementIn Wilson v. Owen,

12a developer granted homeowners purchasing homes in the subdivision the

"privilege" to use two lakes for swimming, boating, and fishing purposes. The deeds

contained a variety of restrictive covenants limiting the use of the land and gave the

homeowners' association, comprised of all the owners, the power to alter the covenants.


22/38

When the majority of the owners voted to revoke the privilege of the owners to use thelakes for recreational purposes, some of the owners sued, claiming that they owned

permanent easements of access to the lakes. The association argued that the "privilege" to

use the lakes was a mere license revocable by the association. Alternatively, it argued that it

was a "covenant" because it appeared as #8 in a list of "restrictions" on use of the conveyed

land. Because the association had the power to amend the restrictions, it could revoke the

access rights.The court rejected the association's argument, holding that the association could amend

"restrictions" on land use but that it could not revoke "privileges" conferred by the deeds. The

court held that the privilege to use the lakes was not merely a revocable license but a

permanent easement. In interpreting the word "privilege" to mean a permanent easement

rather than a revocable privilege,


23/38

What are easements by

estoppel?


24/38

Easements are created by estoppel when anowner gives someone else permission to use her

property in a particular way and the licensee

invests substantially in reasonable reliance on

that permission, and revocation of the licensewould work an injustice.


25/38

HARD CASEHearsay

In Van Schaack v. Torsoe,32

plaintiff who inherited property from her parents

alleged that the neighbors had promised her parents that they would sell them astrip of land along the border for use as a driveway. The parents built their house in

reliance on this permission, there being no other way to get to the parking

spaces behind the house. For a while, they lived without the driveway, parking on

the street. Plaintiff inherited the house from her parents, street parking was cut

off, and she sued the neighbors, claiming an easement by estoppel.


26/38

The court excluded plaintiff's preferred evidence on the ground thatit was inadmissible "hearsay." The hearsay rules are grounded onworries about the reliability of evidence involving things said to peoplewho are not able to testify and the inability to cross-examine the onewho spoke to determine whether they are credible. On the otherhand, "[a]n easement by estoppel, once created, is binding upon suc-cessors in title if reliance upon the existence of the easement

continues,"

33

and excluding the evidence might effectively allow thelicensor to evade the result that would otherwise obtain under thedoctrine of easement by estoppel and work an injustice against aparty who reasonably relied on the representation to her detriment.


27/38

What is theconstructive trust

doctrine?


28/38

They effectively require a property owner to useher property for the benefit of another, or to

grant a non-owner access to the property, or totransfer possession or ownership to another.


29/38

How are constructivetrusts created?


30/38

A trust is a property arrangement thatempowers one person (the trustee) to manageproperty for the benefit of another person (the

beneficiary). Trusts are usually created by adonor who wishes to give a gift but wants to

ensure that the donee uses the property in a par-ticular way.


31/38

What is are therequirements for an

easement of prior use?


32/38

(1) the two parcels were at one time in commonownership;

(2) one of the parcels had derived a "benefit or

advantage" from the other parcel prior to the sale,

(3) this use was both apparent and continuous, and

(4) continuation of the use is "reasonably necessary" or

"convenient" to enjoyment of the dominant estate (theparcel seeking to use the easement on the other's land).


33/38

What are easementsimplied by prior use

also called?


34/38

Easements implied from prior use are alsocalled "quasi-easements.


35/38

When will a courtrecognize an easement

by reasonablenecessity?


36/38

When an owner sells an otherwiselandlocked parcel, a right of way to a public

road will be recognized under the doctrine

of necessity if there is no other way for the

grantee to get to a public way. In such

cases, no easement will be recognizedunless the necessity is absolute, i.e., no

other exit to a public way is available.


37/38

Virginia, the owner of Blackacre, had three children: Carol, Susan, and James. Carol hadsevere medical problems and needed surgery but had no health insurance coverage.

Carol and Susan were expecting to inherit Blackacre someday. They approached

Virginia, asking her to convey Blackacre to them as an "early inheritance." They

planned to obtain a $100,000 mortgage loan on Blackacre, using the funds to pay for

Carol's medical expenses. After Virginia orally agreed to the plan, Carol and Susan

visited Frank, who was Virginia's lawyer and had represented Virginia in the past on a

number of matters. Carol and Susan asked Frank to prepare a deed. Frank prepared a

warranty deed to Blackacre. Three days later, on Friday, June 1, Virginia came to

Frank's office, where she signed the deed. Her signature was notarized by Frank's

paralegal. Carol and Susan were not present at this meeting. Frank retained the deed,

telling Virginia that he would record it in the public record next week. On Sunday,


38/38

June 3, Virginia died in an auto accident. She had no will at the time of her death.Frank did not record the deed. Carol and Susan claim that the deed is valid and that

they own Blackacre as cotenants. James claims the deed is invalid and thus he and his

sisters each own a one-third share of Blackacre as heirs. Which is true?

A. The deed is valid because Virginia voluntarily signed it.

B. The deed is valid because Virginia transferred possession of the deed

to her agent before she died.

C. The deed is invalid because there was no delivery before Virginia

died.

D. The deed is invalid because it was not recorded before Virginia died.

easement flashcards

Documents