This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Desnick v. American Broadcasting 2. Consent a. Glavin v. Eckman b. Jacques v. Steenberg Homes 3. Right of Reasonable Access to Property Open to the Public a. Uston v. Resorts International b. Spirit-murdering the messenger c. The Intelligent Bayesian B. Public Accommodations Statutes and Antidiscrimination Policy (p. 124) 1. Race, Sex and Sexual Orientation Discrimination a. Federal Law i. Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title II ii. Civil Rights Act of 1866 iii. Llewellynn, Deciding Appeals. 2. Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities a. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Tile III 3. Policy Arguments (p. 237). a. Rights: freedom of Action v. Freedom of Security b. Social Utility: Competition v. Secure Investment c. Formal Realizability or Administrability: Rigid Rule v. Flexible Standards C. Copyright and Fair Use (p. 1093) 1. Original Works of Authorship a. Copyright Act of 1976 b. Feist v. Rural Telephone 2. Contributory Infringement a. MGM v. Grokster 3. Fair Use a. Suntrust v. Houghton Mifflin II. Liberty to Use v. Security A. Intro: Land Use Conflict Among Neighbors (p. 227) 1. Trespassory and Nontrepassory Invasions 2. Basic Solutions to Land use conflicts between neighbors a. Entitlements b. Remedies 3. Coase: The reciprocal nature of the problem B. Nuisance (p. 269) 1. Protection of use and enjoyment of land 2. Radiation: defining unreasonable land use a. Page County Appliance v. Honeywell 3. Trees (S.p.11) a. Fancher v. Fagella
Squatters a. Title v. Other informal ways to transfer title to real property 1. Maretti ii. Estoppel 3. Prescriptive Easements (p. title v. Removal of an encroaching structure: relative hardship b. Prah v. Dedication F. Garcia 3. Oral agreement b. Right to dig v. Brown v. p. Massachusetts building code 2. Immunity from loss v. Noone v. 179) 1. Nome 2000 v. Acquiescence c. 286-302) **** . Price b. 242) 1. Nuisance doctrine applied to light i. Fagerstrom B. Building codes and private rights of action i. Jacobs 2. Friendswood v. 284) a. 207) 1. Fontainebleu v. The Improving trespasser a. Law and Economics b. Boundary Settlement a. Law and Economics (p. Possession (Adverse possession. Corbin: Jural relations 2. Color of Title a. Gobble 2. right to support i. Smith-Southwest III. power to acquire (prescription. Border disputes a. Hohfeldian terminology 1. Justifications for adverse possession D. Rejection of nuisance doctrine: no easement for light and air i. Unjust enrichment v. possession) A. Singer: Legal rights debate C. Community Feed Store v. Massachusetts general laws ii. Light and air (p. Lateral support a. Subjacent support a. Lateral and subjacent support/ Support Easements (p. Common law i. Romero v. Somerville v. Arguments and counterarguments **** C.4. forced sale i. Northeastern Culvert E. Forty-five Twenty-five ii.
Cox v. Covenants (p. Kotseas b. b. Limits on negative easements ii. Easements 1. Dolgencorp. Blevins v. 365) 1. Granite properties v. in gross) iii. Finn v. 406) a. Creation by implication a. p. Whitinsville Plaza v. Henley v. Easements by necessity i.15-18) ii. Constructive trusts i. Implied reciprocal negative servitudes in residential subdivisions 3. Land use restrictions (servitudes) A. Licenses C. Interpretation of ambiguous easements: scope and apportionment a. Easements in Gross i. v. Holbrook v. 411-425) a. Continental Cablevision 4. Changed conditions . minimum standards IV. 317) B. Creation of covenants a. Easements by estoppel (irrevocable licenses) i. Modifying and terminating covenants (p. Formal requirements to create i. Express agreements i. Green v. Lupo 3. Historical background b. Glennbrook Co. Rase v. Manns e. No affirmative easements to act on one’s own land d.Power to contract. Rule against reserving an easement in a third party c. Requirements for the burden to run with the land ii. Davidson Bros. Katz and Sons iii. Modifying and terminating easements D. Servitudes (p. For Retarded Citizens 4. Free contract v. Williams 2. Creation by express agreement (Express easements) a. Winn-Dixie v. Taylor b. Prescriptive easements d.Lawrence County Ass. Easements implied from prior use i. (S. Requirements for the benefit to run with the land (appurtenant v. Running with the land i. Interpretation of ambiguous covenants (p. Castle Mountain Ranch c. Historical background 2. Writing ii. Appurtenant easements i. Barry. Validity: substantive limitation son the kind of easements that can be created i.
450) (Public policy limits on enforceability of servitudes and future interests) a. Free tenures a. Davidson Bros. Blakely v. Relative hardship c. Restraints on alienation (p. Northwest Real Estate v. Gorin E. Community land trusts and limited equity co-ops d. ii. Language ii. v. c. Cooperatives c. Kadison d. Cormier b. Direct restraints on alienation i. Homeowners associations and condominiums b. Grandview at Emerald Hills 4. Jahren V. Regulation of covenants and homeowners associations (p. Estates system and future interests (p. Aquarian Foundation v. 474) a. Common-interest communities a. El Di v. Other equitable defenses i. Release iv. Prescription d. Restrictions on leasing i. Massachusetts general laws ii. Statutes i. Appel v. Consent of the association 1. Cottonwood Village Condominium Ass. The feudal hierarchy 3. Inc. Public policy limitations and review for reasonableness (p. Riste v. Woodsine village condominium association v. 424) 1. Historical background: from feudalism to the market 1. Serio 2.529) A. Katz and Sons b. Grantor consent clauses 1. Covenants i. Eastern Washington Bible Camp ii. Presley Companies 3. Rights of first refusal or preemptive rights i. Town of Bethany Beach b. Wolinsky v. Division of ownership over time B. Merger iii. 493. Tenures and services . O’Buck v. Horse Pond Fish & Game v. Sholom House. Relations between unit owners and developers a. Rules and bylaws i. A modern analogy 2.i. Private governments and gated communities 2. Neuman v. Consent to sell provisions i.
Rule against perpetuities (to p. D. Cathedral of the Incarnation v. Supplemental Readings 1. Land ownership in a free and equal society 3. b. 569-599) VI. Trusts and the cy pres doctrine Regulatory rules 1. 529). Defeasible fees i. Life estates a. Bradley 2. Trusts 6. Rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation 3. Edwards v. Alienability 6. Inheritability b. Destructability of contingent remainders d. Reversion sand remainders b. E. Historical categories of current significance a. life estate i. Garden City Development b. defeasible fee i. Freehold and non-freehold interests b. Rule against the creation of new estates a. Summary a. Presumption against forfeitures and the grantor’s intent a. Rule in Shelley’s case 3. Alien land laws Common Ownership (p. Whitton 2. F. Johnson v. Wood v. Fee tail 4.C. Feudal incidents 4. Regulation of future interests 5. . When the future interest belongs to a third party 2. Fee simple v. Michael 2. Unfree tenures 5. The perpetual conflict among generations: dead hand control and alienability 8. Legal and equitable interests: executrory interest and the development of trusts The Estates system 1. Contingent and vested remainders c. Avoiding feudal incidents 7. Fee simple v. De Peyster v. Board of County Commissioners of Fremont County ii. Fee simple absolute b. Estates system: chart of freehold interests**** Interpretation of ambiguous conveyances 1. Growth of the fee simple a. When the future interest belongs to the grantor ii. Doctrine of worthier title e. Fee simple interests a.
On divorce iii. Tenhet v. Leasehold estates (p. Kresha ii. and curtesy b. Separate property i. On divorce iii. Tenancy by the entirety C. Sawada v. Conflicts about rent (p. Tenancy in common and joint tenancy 2. Olivas v. Deking b. Historical background a. Rights and obligations of co-owners 1. Regulation of landlord-tenant relationships 2. Married woman’s property acts 2. Marital property 1. Tenancy by the entirety a. Community property and separate property a. Types of tenancies a. Coverture. Statute of frauds d. Homestead laws VII. Landlord’s remedies when tenant breaches and leaves . Boswell c. Kresha v. Categories of tenancies c. During marriage ii. 639) 1. Death i. Conflicts over rent and possession 1. On death b. Conflicts over transfers by one co-owner 1. Notes 2. On death c. Landlord’s remedies when tenant breaches and refuses to leave: summary process b. Landlord’s right to receive rent a. Olivas D. Family conflicts over use of common property i. Endo b. judicial process B. dower. Commercial and residential tenancies b. Notes E. Tenancy in common and joint tenancy a. Landlord tenant law A. 658) 1. During marriage ii.A. Identifying landlord-tenant relationships: self-help v. Carr v. Varieties of common ownership B. Divorce i. Premarital agreements d. Community property i.
Spears ii. Sebastian v. Notes b. Landlord’s duty to deliver possession 2. Tenant’s right to habitable premises 1. Tenant’s right to assign or sublet i. Olanoff c. Javins v. First National Realty ii. VIII. Forfeiture i. Floyd ii. landlord’s right to control occupancy a. Notes 4. Zinn b. Doctrinal development i. Central Financial Services v. Regulation of security deposits 2. Kendall v. p. Van Reken ii. Commonwealth v. Stonebraker v. When the lease requires the landlord’s consent 1. Debtor protection legislation b. Installment land contracts a. Regulating the foreclosure process i. Randolph b. Making mortgage protection nondisclaimable i. 36-58) a. Supplemental Readings (S. Koenig v. Real estate transactions A. Slavin v. Kridel 2. Fremont Loan and Insurance . Mortgages a. Rent control C. The covenant of quiet enjoyment and constructive eviction a. Notes 3. Notes 2. Transfer of the landlord’s reversion b. Sommer v. Problems 2. Uniform residential landlord and tenant act (S. p.Landlord’s duty to mitigate damages 1. 679) 1. Minjak v. Conflicts about occupancy (p. Implied warranty of habitability a. Ernest Pestana 2. Arguments and counterarguments on compulsory contract terms **** c. Notes ii. Equitable mortgages i. 32-36) i. Real estate finance 1. Notes D. Tenant’s right to leave and transfer the leasehold v. Blackett v. When the lease is silent ii. Rent Control Board of Brookline 3.
Conditional or contract zoning 2. Kansas b. Foy c. Discrimination based on sexual orientation a. Fair Housing Act.C.S. LaBrie ii. Edouard v. City of Memphis v. Problem 2. Race discrimination a. Problem 3. Reasonable accommodations of persons with disabilities i. United States v. Notes IX. The Planning process 1. Mugler v. 817) A. The comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance c. Notes b. Planned unit developments d. Discrimination by housing providers i. Problems b. 42 U. Historical background a. Anti-discrimination law in the housing market (p. M & T Mortgage v. 911) A. Familial status: families with children i. Powell v. Civil Rights Act of 1866 i. Persons with AIDS i. Problems 4. Puff v. Kozubal b. Intentional discrimination or discriminatory treatment 1. Hoffius ii. Notes iii. Marital status: unmarried couples i. Starrett City iii. Problems c. Broughman ii. SS 3601-3631 b. Ashbury v. Pennsylvania . Notes c. Greene ii. Zoning enabling act b. Fair housing act i. McCready v.b. Administrative procedures: the zoning board of adjustment B. Human Rights Commission v. Problems X. Zoning (p. Notes iv. Sex discrimination: sexual harassment a. Legislative process: enacting the zoning ordinance a. Caro ii. Discrimination based on family status a. Zoning: police power and property rights 1.
Mahon f. Regulatory Takings (p. 5. 1013-1016) b. Notes c. Ad hoc test: Fairness and Justice 1. Notes (p. Town of Belleville v. Property as a mediator between citizens and the state 1. 1018-1020) a.2. NYC 3. Notes 5. 953) A. Ambler Realty g. Village of Willowbrook v. Teleprompter Manhattan . Spot zoning Exclusionary zoning Equal protection. Keystone Coal v. substantive due process. Problems 2. Physical invasions a. Miller v.63-64. Robbins b. Stone v. City of Wilton ii. Vested rights (P. Cochran v. Buchanan v. Penn Central v. Prior nonconforming uses i. and free speech a. defending property rights 2. Notes c. Vested rights i. Notes iii. Special cases 1. Fairfax County Board of Zoning Appeals ii. Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Village of Euclid v. Problems XI. De Benedictis 4. Problem C. Deprivation of core property rights a. Per se (Categorical) takings 1. Historical background 3. Loretto v. Hadacheck v. Special exceptions b. Sebastian d. Babbitt v. 3. c. Youpee (p. Olech b. Defining v. 4. City of Cambridge Limits to zoning laws designed to protect preexisting property rights a. Problems Limits on preferential zoning a. Warley e. Schoene 2. Nectow v. Parillo’s b. Pennsylvania Coal v. 1016) c. Established investments D. Per se takings and the Ad hoc test B. Variances i.
Notes 2. 58-60) 1. Sioux Nation of Indians 2. Federal constitution a. City of New London 2. Current Indian land claims a. Problems E. 3) A. 1051) 1. Deprivation of economically viable use a. Supplemental readings (S. p. Notes d. Homestead act and land grants C. united States b. Tahoe-Sierra Preservation v. Tee-hit Ton Indians v. Palazzo v. Navajo Nation v. State constitutions a. Forced seizures of property from American Indian Nations a. Lucas v. Problems 2. Public use (p. Conquest 1. Problem X. Kelo v. Property rights derived from competing sovereigns a. Indian title (p. United States . Notes e. Problems B. McIntosh b. Tahoe Regional Planning d. Johnson v. Government grant 1. United States v. South Carolina Coastal Council b.c. Rhode Island c. Notes 3.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.