Property Law Concepts - Property Law - Solved Exam, Exams of Property Law

Download Property Law Concepts - Property Law - Solved Exam and more Exams Property Law in PDF only on Docsity! ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Stanley ID: (Exam Number) Exam Name: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Instructor: Stanley Grade: Page 1 of 1 Exam taken with SofTest v10.0 ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Stanley 1) s====s=== Start of Answer #1 (2769 words) ======== Essay Question #1 Memorandum to Son and Wife: re legal advice regarding "POPS" convenience store The first order of business is to discuss the lease between Mom and Pop and the Landlord. A term of years lease is one that has a definitive lease term with rental amount which automatically ends on the termination date. Here we have a written lease for 3 years for a total of $10,000, payable in quarterly increments. There is also a no transfer clause. Transfer in this case may be interpreted as not allowing “subleases or assignments." There are further restrictions that limit the up stairs to a residence for “mom and pop only" and the convenience store is limited to certain items such as packaged snacks and coffee. Our first argument is that there exists a lease between LL and Son and Wife. We have a term of years lease starting April 1st 2008 and ending March 31st 2011. A term of year lease automatically terminates at the natural end date of March 31st 2011. After March 31st Mom and Pop should have vacated the building or created a new contract. Because of that, Mom and Pop became Tenants at Sufferance, or hold over tenants. Whenever there is a holdover tenant the LL must within a reasonable time decide if the tenants are trespassers, or create a new lease. Because the LL did not consider them Trespassers within a reasonable time, he sent a letter in December 2012 an ton \ ope . stating they are trespassers, Mem-ancd-Pops lease turned into a “period ease." 10 of law A Page 1 of 10 (Question 1 continued) {i NSA A ool ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL yi stanley | \o damages such as those from wear and tear or use only on residential property. Under commercial there is no duty to repair or maintain. Here we have two defective issues, the hole in the wall and the stairway. The hole is part-of the store and thus commercial property so it is the tenants duty to repair the wall. The stairway is related to the residence use and so the LL should repair the stairway. In fact ma jot repairing the Binley UF wiaken Naidonee We taht, ( stairway is a dependeht covenant and as such the tenant could sue for jamages pial breach the lease if the stairway is not fixed. The hole in the store is an independent mi covenant and thus you can only sue for specific performance or damages. The LL must have notice and be a given an opportunity to fix the defects. he duty of quiet olen eae that the LL will evict through actual eviction, i ‘Fined eviction or constructheviction without reasonable grounds. Actual eviction is when the landlord serves a written eviction notioe i i iction4 the.Ll takes ’ a 0 f agtiorNhat inhi ise of your p i Here we have the LL’ of notifying Son & Wife that they are trespassers and not allowed on the property. uo Because there is a periodic lease in place, this type of action is an.actual eviction in violation of the LL covenant allow the tenant to live in quiet enjoyment of their property. Ee As it stands now the LL had no right to evict the Son and Wife as tenants. 6 en aa Further he has not given sufficient notice to terminate the lease. He must give at least Ve 6 months notice to terminate the lease in an annual lease. Son and Wife should be able to sue for LL for under privity of estate for damages janc specific performance. They could also sue Mom and Pop(maybe they have insurance?) under contract theory. They should be allowed back onto their property and refunded any expenses that were incurred in moving, as well as any loss profits that might have resulted. Further if they did not want to return to the property they can recover their lost rents since they hk of wy ae 40 oul WW (Question 4 continued) ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Stanley prepaid. The best case scenario for the tenants is to recover all of their past rent and any expenses in moving their belongings as the LL can simply give adequate notice and terminate the lease ending March 31st, 2013. If Son & Wife can make a decent amount of money until then, then it may be best to also sue for specific performance. It also should be noted that modernly a LL can terminate a lease for an unreasonable reason, (however in this case it was interfering with his business so it \ | ber) UX x would not be unreasonable.) Essay Question #2 Do the condo owners have a right as stated in the original CC&R to use the homeowner's property to access the beach? The courts have generally given HOAs superior rights and broad swaths of power to change or address anything they choose within the HOA agreements. This is generally due to a provision in the CC&R agreement that allows revisions and/or amends to the e£5- of the board of director does not allow a change in the CC&R if it is not spegified? CC&R. Was there any provision for amendment given to the HOA? A simple majority aby + 02S Wr Assuming they are not allowed to change the CC: we must establish if the covenai is valid and transferable to new owners, as indicate there has been se’ transfer of ownerships of the luxury property. \ wera Areal covenant is an express written agreement that containers a burden and benefit to Page 5 of 10 (Question 1 continued) ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Stanley \ two pieces of property. In order to establish a real covenant the burdened side hnust ol have notice, 2) intent to bind all owners and successors, 3) horizontal and vertical privity 4) touch and concern the land. Notice can be obtained by 3 ways, written notice on the deed, inquiry notice, and constructive notice. The burdened property here are the luxury beach front homes. Actual notice is given bi iewing the CC&Rs and potentially the deeds th bh b: yy reviewing the CC&Rs and potentially the deeds emselves wi en subsequent coe owners bought the property. The facts are not clear on inquiry tee “ owner can look back at deeds recorded at the state office to determine if a covenant exists, and constructive notice is based on the facts and surroundings, meaning if the luxury estate have watched people walk on their property-for 10 the last 10 years, that is constructive notice. Interit to bind all owners and successors is clearly outlined by the rules established in the CC&R. iz rivity i ially was there privity of estate between the burdened-and servient land when the transfer was made. Here we Cov ade. A a of tle ofall Latr have a large plot of land selling 1 piece o d, there is a transfer of land and they were made at the same time, thus there is horizontal privity/ Vertical privity is established for those who are not original owners, meaning those who may have bought the luxury properties from another further down. Vertical privity is satisfied when the entire property is sold, in fee simple absolute. There is a clause in the CC&R that all owners must be FSA so therefore we know that any and all owners are FSA and thus satisfy vertical privity. Finally for Touch and concern on the burdened side, it must reduce their rights or the value of the property. Here that is clearly the case as people are allowed to walk across the luxury estates properties in order to get to the beach. Page 6 of 10 (Question 1 continued) ID: Property_LS2_Stanley Final_2012SL Stanley how can Niecy get around the zoning to build Phase 11? Zoning is allowed through the police power if it pertains to the "health, safety, morals, and general welfare” of the people. If it does not the it should be found unconstitutional. Further, if the government limits the land, is it considered a taking? Should the persons be reimbursed? Here we have the municipal authority prohibiting all future development of the 2000 acre lot. It is unclear exactly why the government prohibited any future building, but it does not seem to be a stretch to tie this effort into the health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Perhaps they thought the area would become to crowded and destroy the habitat of the island, and thus would ruin contribute to the general ruin of the island. Or they saw the hotel, golf course, shops, and restaurants listed in the marketing materials for phase Il, perhaps the added tourism would destroy the island or perhaps could affect the health of the indigenous peoples. Based on any number of reasons listed above, there is a good chance this will not be found unconstitutional. It however seems strange and perhaps unwise to completely limit any future building on the 2000 plot of land. Under the “Per if land has no further economic use, or no longer has any valu@, this is constituted a taking) The government would have to | ca refund the “fair market value" of the lan indy. The government may try and | b argue that there is use and value in the land beaching a beach, but as there is already >a another beach it seems unlikely that anyone would go there and further it may be uneconomical to use the land without any buildings on it. Page 9 of 10 (Question 1 continued} ID: Property_LS2_Stanley_Final_2012SL Stanley Under the AdHoc test to see if there is a takings, there is 3 parts. The first is... The second is the economic character of the act, how adversely affects the owner. The third is the disparate affect on the owners, does it affect 1 or many? Here we have a huge affect on the economy of the owner. He is not only stripped from Phase I! but also stripped from potentially building owners. The character of this action is complete deprivation. And the last prong is only 1 owner is affected, then its solely directed at one person, for one purpose. This will also qualify as a taking under the Adhoc test. Ultimately, Niecy unfortunately you do not own the 2000 acres but you should easily be able to rectify your beach front access on the 3000 acres. ss====== End of Answer #1 == Page 10 of 10 ID: ‘ Property_LS2_Stanley_Finai_2012SL Stanley END OF EXAM Page 1 of 0