Property Cases
Terms
undefined, object
copy deck
- State v. Baker
- NJ zoning restriction prohibits having four unrelated people living together in a home; If purpose is to prevent crowding, it doesn't accomplish goal: could have 12 related people in one home; Court finds that zoning requirement must be logically related to stated goal
- US v. 1500 Lincoln Avenue
- Husband selling prescription drugs illegally out of pharmacy; US wants to confiscate his interest in property; No divisible interest in Tenancy by Entireties; Alito says he forfeits his interest; US takes on his full interest in common with her full interest; If she dies first, US gets fee simple; if he dies first; she gets fee simple - his life is still measure
- Berg v. Wiley
- Landlord is not entitled to self help remedies, risk of violence; Landlord must go through due process
- Boomer v. Atlantic Cement Co.
- cement plant pollutes air; Liability rule for plaintiffs; Utility of factory > harm to plaintiffs; factory pays plaintiffs "permanent damages"; like purchasing and entitlement, a permanent right of access for cement dust
- MGM v. Grokster
- not economical for copyright holders to sue users, sue device makers instead; precedent Sony v. Universal City Studios; VCR does not infringe because there is a substantial non-infringing use; In Grokster, device makers were promoting infringing use
- Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (Nexus Test)
- expansion of house would block public view of beachfront; Coastal Commission offered permit to expand house if owner will give public easement across beachfront; Scalia announces Nexus Test: only ok if the purpose of the exaction would also have been served by the denial of the permit; if there is no nexus of purpose it is a taking
- Coffin v. The Left Hand Ditch Co.
- first party to appropriate stream for a beneficial purpose has prior right against later parties
- Raab v. Casper
- Casper built house partially on Raab's land; Raab warned Casper halfway through building; Court awarded money damages to Raab (liability rule); If encroachment had not been in good faith, Raab would have gotten a property rule
- Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon
- Coal Company owned rights to mine coal, but coal caused ground under houses to collapse; Coal Company said that requiring them to leave support columns of coal was a taking of their right to that coal; Holmes rules it is a taking because it is a 100% diminution in value of the support columns, outweighs public benefit; Brandeis dissents it is not a taking because state can regulate to protect health, safety, prevent nuisance without compensation; should calculate diminution of columns compared to value of whole property
- Moore v. City of East Cleveland
- town had adopted single family zoning restrictions with very narrow concept of single family; grandmother with two non-sibling grandchildren challenged; court struck down the zoning restriction because the definition of family was too narrow; racial undertones to trying to prevent extended family situations
- Dolan v. City of Tigard (Rough Proportionality Test)
- City granted permit with condition that Dolan dedicate area for greenway along floodplain and area for a bike path; Court finds that nexus test is met but is not sufficient; Court finds that the exaction fails to pass the Rough Proportionality Test: The requirements must be roughly proportional to the harm imposed on community by permit
- Restatement 2nd of Torts
- § 821b Public Nuisance: Unreasonable interference with a right common to the public; § 822 Private Nuisance: Intentional and unreasonable OR Unintentional and negligent, reckless or abnormally dangerous; § 826 Unreasonable if: harm to plaintiff > the utility of defendant's conduct; harm to plaintiff is serious and compensation would not make defendant's conduct infeasible
- PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins
- School kids want to set up table to get petition signed inside of shopping mall; Mall was inviting general public in, acts as town square, cannot exclude students' use
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
- Lucas bought two beachfront lots for $975,000; SC passed Beachfront Management act preventing him from building house; Scalia found a total (100%) taking
- Pile v. Pedrick I
- right of encroachee is absolute against the trespass; Pedrick must remove the wall; Pile v. Pedrick II: added one year period to allow Pedrick to remove wall
- Medico-Dental Bldg. Co. v. Horton & Converse
- Lease had non-compete clause for pharmacy use, but Dr. Boonshaft moved in and sells drugs; Horton wants to rescind because of Landlord's breach; Court finds that the exclusive right was essential to the purpose of the lease, therefore tenant can rescind (Contract view)
- Marvin v. Marvin
- can unmarried cohabitants contract into the rights of marriage? courts concerned that contract may rely on sexual services, therefore look like prostitution; Court is willing to say that living together as a couple may show intent to divide assets or show an implied contract and reliance
- Smith v. Chanel
- company can market product as "like Chanel"; perfume was not patented; public policy rationale in making a low price version of high price products
- Cheney Bros v. Doris Silk
- patterns cannot be patented, would take too much time; there is no relief available
- Riddle v. Harmon
- Mr. & Mrs. Riddle hold property as Joint Tenants; Mrs. Riddle tries to unilaterally sever; no livery of season; open, requires two people, provides information to market
- Downey v. General Foods Corp.
- Jello, Mr. Wiggle; importance of originality or novelty
- People v. Nogarr
- Couple owned house as joint tenants; he borrowed money unilaterally from parents; he died; Mortgage did not sever joint tenancy; Lender could have sought recover prior to son's death, could have forced both parties tot sign; could have charged more to reflect risk
- Village of Belle Terre Case
- town zoned single family to keep out students; court allowed
- Sawada v. Endo
- competing interests of protecting spouses v. protecting rights of creditors; here creditor is involuntary, tort creditor; court uses language of voluntary creditors to shield non-debtor spouse from debts incurred by other
- Portola Hills Community Ass'n v. James
- Homeowners' association objected to plans that included satellite dish; potential harm was to appearance of neighborhood, but homeowner had extensive landscaping plans to make dish unseen; court found it was unreasonable to prevent dish because installation plans were reasonable within the intent of restriction
- Loretto v. Manhattan Teleprompter
- Building owner says government requirement that she tolerate cable box and wire is a taking; Loretto won $1; Permanent physical occupation is always a taking regardless of degree of public benefit or private burden; strict liability, bright line rule
- Nectow v. City of Cambridge
- only other zoning case Supreme Court took for nearly 20 years; proves Euclid by exception; town could not even show that the zoning promoted health, safety, etc.
- Moore v. Regents of California
- Moore sued hospital for doctor who took cells from his organs and used them to start a commercially profitable line of cells; prohibition of organ sales is not applicable, would have stronger footing if he claimed exclusion; court found that disclosure was lacking
- Campbell v. Acuff-Rose, 2 Live Crew / "Pretty Woman" case
- fair use of parody; can a song be a parody if it is commercial; must borrow from original to make comment on the original; not likely to have substantial effect on the market for the original song
- Pierson v. Post - Foxes
- Post, a hunter, was pursuing a fox. Pierson, prevented Post from catching the fox, killed it, and carried it off (saucy intruder); Court rules that property in animals is acquired by occupancy. Pierson's act produces no legal remedy. Dissent says foxes are nuisance and court should have ruled for Post to encourage hunters. Today, cultural norms have changed. Fox might be protected.
- Armory v. Delamarie
- boy finds jewel and takes it to jeweler for evaluation; jeweler tries to keep it; finder has right against all the world except the true owner
- Faus v. City of Los Angeles
- Developer granted easement to city for purposes of electric railway; City stops railway services and wants to replace it with buses; Faus bought up the Servient Interest of the developer's heirs; Court rules for City finding that the primary purpose of the easement was to provide transportation; Court did not address if the burden was reasonable
- Jordan v. Talbot
- Tenant fails to pay rent; landlord enters, removes stuff to storage; tenant returns, landlords employee tells her to get out; Landlord's agent violated CA Code policy against turning out possessor by menacing conduct; Tenant cannot waive statutory rights; Property View; Calabresi "Inalienability Rule" entitlement; cannot contract away; Not Contract View; Calabresi "Property Rule" entitlement; can contract away
- Hannah v. Peel
- soldier finds brooch in landowner's house; landowner owns everything attached to and under the land, but not necessarily laying on top of
- Bennis v. Michigan
- Husband met prostitute in car; state confiscated car under nuisance law; Court upholds confiscation, wasn't worth much anyway
- Evans v. Merriweather
- Evans mill was upstream of Merriweather's mill. During a drought, Evans diverted all the water into his own mill; Court applies reasonable use test; court differentiates between natural and artificial uses; Evans diversion was for artificial use and deprived Merriweather of natural use; Diverting water was not reasonable.
- Finley v. Botto
- Two buildings side by side, pathway between was owned by Botto but used by tenants of both buildings;Botto rebuilds fence between buildings; fence blocks access to rear of Finley's building; Court finds that Finley's use was permissive and not under claim of right
- INS v. AP
- INS is the saucy intruder, Post; AP is gathering information and reporting; INS must not reap where it has not sown
- Reese v. Borghi
- Reese (Dominant) had easement across land purchased by Borghi (Servient); Borghi built house blocking Reese's pathway and land-locking Reese; Court finds Reese has Easement by Necessity; Borghi provide alternate path specified by court; Public policy issue of not creating unusable parcels of land
- Marsh v. Alabama
- Jehovah's Witness wanted to distribute religious literature in a privately owned town; Courts allow her access; Town was indistinguishable from a municipally owned town; Court also wants to protect townspeople's right to access of information
- Swartzbaugh v. Sampson
- Mr & Mrs. Swartzbaugh owned land as joint tenants; Mr. S signs leas with Sampson who clears walnut trees and builds boxing ring; Court finds she cannot exclude husband's use, but can demand Accounting; She should have claimed ouster - inability to enjoy walnut trees
- Waschak v. Moffat
- fumes from culm banks (refuse piles of a coal breaker) damaged paint on plaintiff's house; Property rule for defendants (defendants have right to pollute); Court ruled that plaintiffs came to the nuisance; "without smoke, Pittsburgh would have remained a very pretty village." bread > sky; cost of prevention > cost of harm; benefit of factory > harm to plaintiff
- Lawrence v. Texas
- Texas law criminalizing private consensual homosexual activity is unconstitutional
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.
- Amber wants to build industrial development at $$$ but portion of land is zoned for residential use which will only bring $, claims violation of due process; Court analogizes justification of zoning to nuisance control, justified when related to health and safety (low standard of scrutiny); court says that if rational for zoning is a close call it will defer to legislature
- Javins v. First National Realty Co.
- Court found that the implied warranty of habitability is not waivable, inalienable; tenant's remedies are Rescission, Damages, Injunctive Relief
- Martin Luther King v. Mister Maestro, Estate of King v. CBS
- King's performance of the speech was not a publication that would place material on open market
- Right to Life Advocates v. Aaron Women's Clinic
- Right to Life Advocates are protesting on private sidewalk, blocking access to patrons; Unlike in PruneYard, building occupants did not invite in general public, but only potential clients; Alternate means of expressing free speech are reasonable (from public sidewalk)
- US v. One 1984 Toyota Truck
- Husband used truck to deliver drugs; US wants truck; Court says wife gets to keep the truck
- Loving v. Virginia (1967)
- race based regulation of marital property rights is unconstitutional
- Joint Tribal Council of the Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton
- US might be liable for failure to protect Indians in land transactions under Nonintercourse Act
- Mannillo v. Gorski
- Gorksi's concrete walk laid more than 20 years prior (meets statute of limitations) encroached on Mannillo's land by 15 inches; NJ court holds that intent is irrelevant; court remands issue of Open and Notorious to trial; if open & notorious AP is met; If encroachment is innocent and costly to remove, Gorski gets land, Mannillo gets payment of fair market value
- Schild v. Rubin
- Schilds have basketball court; Rubins complained about the noise; neighborliness has failed: conflicting uses, no reciprocity, end of relationship in sight, rights unclear, lower cost of formal legal action
- City of Ladue v. Gilleo
- City ordinance against signs; Gilleo put sign up in yard, filed suit that ordinance violated her right to free speech; court recognizes a special respect for individual liberty in the home
- California Family Code
- spouse can be reimbursed for contributions to education
- Stambovsky v. Ackley
- Seller had duty to disclose defects, especially since she had advertised them and they could not be found though conventional inspection
- Laguna Royale Owners Ass'n v. Darger
- Occupancy agreement requires no selling or subletting without association's approval; Dargers wanted to sell 1/4 shares to three other people; court finds that restriction does not pass a reasonableness test
- O'Brien v. O'Brien
- is medical license marital property divisible at divorce; court says yes, marriage = economic partnership, invested together to enhance earning potential
- Tulk v. Moxhay
- origin of Servitudes; affirmative covenant to maintain the square as a garden; negative covenant not to build on the square; it would be inequitable to let purchaser buy with restriction and then sell without restriction; court found covenant despite lack of horizontal privity and gave remedy of Injunction
- Eagle Enterprises, Inc. v. Gross
- party 1 provides water, party 2 accepts and pays $35 per year, covenant shall run with the land; Gross, successor to party 2, wants to drill a well; there is intent, there is vertical privity; court says the promised action doesn't touch and concern the land; it is more of a contract; Eagle could have argued for prevention of overuse of underground water supply
- Stoyanoff v. City of Berkeley
- landowner is restricted by architectural board from building non-traditional pyramid-shaped home; court finds that judgment on aesthetics alone goes too far, but judgment based on property values is ok
- Kelo v. New London
- took from residents and gave to developer; Court said taking was ok; O'Connor dissented saying that Hawaii and Berman represented extraordinary circumstances and that her words "co-terminus with the police power" were an unfortunate phrasing
- Bolotin v. Rindge
- Deed restricts Bolitin's property to residential use; he sues for declaratory relief; Court finds restriction is still enforceable because a benefit still accrues to other neighbors; circumstances have not changed so much as to burden party without benefit to adjoining owners; Property rule for neighbors
- Bormann v. Board of Supervisors, Kossuth County, Iowa
- government zoning that prohibits neighbors from suing to recover from nuisance is a taking; property owners have right to be free of the nuisance
- Buchanan v. Warley
- court will not enforce zoning by Race
- Poletown v. Detroit
- Town took from residents and gave to General Motors; Courts said the taking was ok, but overruled itself years later
- Riste v. Eastern Washington Bible Camp, Inc.
- D placed restriction on sale of land, sold land to P. P tried to sell contrary to restrictions, sued for declaration that restrictions were invalid; Court rules that the restrictions on transfer is "void as repugnant to the nature of an estate in fee."
- State v. Shack
- Farmer provided housing camp for migrant workers employed on his land; Attorney and health worker want access to camp to meet with one of workers; Farmer has right to exclude general public but must allow migrant workers to receive visitors, peddlers, members of press; Migrant worker cannot contract away these rights, inalienable; Legislative provisions did not insist on access, is court announcing a new property rule, is this a taking
- Sommer v. Kridel
- Landlord has duty to mitigate damages (contract view); tenant signed lease; circumstances changed; wrote letter asking to be let out; despite inquiry about particular apartment, landlord did not lease property until 1 year later; property view would be that tenant has an estate in land, so tenant is obligated to pay and landlord doesn't have to mitigate
- Marriage of Graham
- is an M.B.A. marital property divisible at divorce; court says no, too speculative to value, has no exchange value
- Johnson v. M'Intosh
- Plaintiff sues for ejectment from land of defendant who is in possession. Parties have conflicting claims of title. Plaintiff's title made by chiefs of Indian tribes is not valid. US government had dominion over all land; only grants from government are valid
- Spur Industries v. Del Webb Development Co.
- retirement community expands to proximity with cattle ranch, complains about nuisance of cattle smell; Liability rule for the ranch: residents pay ranch to relocate
- Jacque v. Steenberg Homes
- Jacque wants Steenberg to take trailer around on the road. Steenberg crosses Jacque's property anyway
- McAvoy v. Medina
- customer forgets wallet on counter of barber shop; if item is mislaid and forgotten, owner and proprietor have rights above finder
- Fitzgerald v. Modoc County
- P granted land to D "to be used as and for a county high school"; court finds that conditions subsequent are not favored because they restrict the use of the land; Public policy rationale to avoid Dead-Hand Control
- Painter v. Painter
- court may make an equitable distribution of marital assets; acquired property is marital property even if acquired as a gift
- Ghen v. Rich
- Ghen shot whale; whale sunk; Ellis found whale; Rich bought whale from Ellis; Norm would have been for Ghen to pay Ellis a finder's fee; Court rules that Ghen can recover profit of whale oil
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York
- NYC Landmark Commission rejects two designs to build high-rise on top of Grand Central Station; Supreme Court could have denied cert. because Penn Cent. has only been told not to build two designs, not to not build at all; Court says this is not a taking per Balancing Test; balance public benefit and private diminution in value; owner's reasonable backed expectations are accommodated by transferable development rights
- Geragosian v. Union Realty Co.
- strict property rule for Geragosian: remove platform, stop using drain; court says a particular piece of real estate cannot be replaced by any sum of money; court acknowledges exceptions to absolute rule of property rights; Estoppel (owner gave permission); Laches (owner waited too long); Refusal to consent to removal; De minimis (minimal encroachment)
- Shelley v. Kraemer
- Neighbors had racist covenant on land, was it enforceable on successors; Court ruling that would enforce discriminatory covenant would violate Civil Rights Act
- Keeble v. Heckeringill - Ducks
- Plaintiff owns land with a duck blind. Defendant used loud noises to scare ducks away from Plaintiff's blind. Court holds that to act to prevent property owner from valuable economic activity violates property rights. i.e. example of school scaring students away from rival school vs. tempting them to a better school
- Hidden Harbour Estates Inc. v. Norman
- Condo passed rule barring alcohol in common areas; Court finds that homeowners can only regulate things that count as a nuisance
- Brown v. Voss
- Voss owns tract A (Servient); Brown buys tract B (Dominant) and an easement across tract A. Brown buys adjacent tract C and begins to build a house across B & C; Voss claims Brown cannot use easement to access C; Court finds Liability Rule for Voss: Brown gets right of access; Voss gets $1
- Hawaii Housing v. Midkiff
- Hawaii state government took land from a group of landlords and gave it to the tenants; Former landlords got just compensation; Hawaii state government was trying to break up a block of landlords who controlled most of the rental property and were raising rents