Case summary: A two-story home was sold by the person W and person EB to a person VS in Roche town. The deed on warranty did not specify the covenants which will be involved in Conveyance. There was a public park adjacent to the property that included the famous frisbee golf court. The deed allowed the Roche citizen the right to walk on the public trail in the park. Teens regularly threw the frisbee to the walking path that is behind the land of VS. He shouted and demanded that the teenagers should not throw the objects on his land.
To find: The type of agreement in real property law.
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Chapter 26 Solutions
Bundle: The Legal Environment Of Business: Text And Cases, 10th + Mindtap Business Law, 1 Term (6 Months) Printed Access Card
- Eric and Susan just purchased their first home, which cost $140,000. They purchased a homeowner’s policy to insure the home for $130,000 and personal property for $80,000. They declined any coverage for additional living expenses. The deductible for the policy is $500. Soon after Eric and Susan moved into their new home, a strong windstorm caused damage to their roof. They reported the roof damage to be $19,500. While the roof was under repair, the couple had to live in a nearby hotel for three days. The hotel bill amounted to $420. Assuming the insurance company settles claims using the replacement value method, what amount will the insurance company pay for the damages to the roof?arrow_forwardIrene and Joy were co-owners of a parcel of land. On September 26, 2020, Irene discovered that Joy has sold her share to Yeri on August 25, 2020. The following day, Irene offered to redeem her share from Yeri, but the latter replied that Irene's right to redeem has already prescribed. Is Yeri correct?arrow_forwardPeter has been in practise as a doctor in Sydney since 1982. In 1984, he purchased a 25-hectares farm near Batlow, which is considered the premium apple growing region in Australia. The purchase price for the farm was $700,000. Peter borrowed the funds to purchase the farm. At the time of purchase the farm was used to grow apples and Peter continued to grow apples on the farm, employing a full-time manager for this purpose.As a result of the Black Summer bushfires in 2019/2020 however, most of the apple trees and packing sheds on Peter’s farm were destroyed. Peter decided not to replant apple trees. Instead, he decided to grow hazelnuts and cherries because he believed these would provide a higher yield than apples given current market prices.In late 2021, Peter arranged with his farm manager to oversee the removal of all remaining and burned-out apple trees on the farm and to prepare the soil to make it suitable for planting 200 cherry trees and 100 hazelnut trees. It was estimated…arrow_forward
- Oscar conveys Grouchland to Grover on January 16, 2019. Oscar conveys the same property to Elmo who does not know about Grover and who records his deed on January 18, 2019. Oscar then conveys the property to Bert who doesn't know about Grover or Elmo and who does not record the deed. Oscar then conveys the property to Ernie who knows about Bert and records the deed. Who has title to property if the jurisdiction follows a notice statute? Ernie Elmo Bert Groverarrow_forwardKevin rents a farm from Jacob, the main purpose of which is for Kevin to live in the farmhouse as his residential accommodation. During the period of the lease, and with Jacob’s consent, Kevin effects various improvements to the leased property, the most notable of which included: 1. Erecting security fences throughout the farm. 2. Planting trees. 3. Clearing and ploughing pieces of land to plant vegetables. 4. Installing sprinkler irrigation systems. The lease has reached its expiration date, and Kevin has since vacated the premises. Q.5.3 Kevin approaches you for advice on whether he can successfully recover compensation for the above improvements he made to the property. Advise Kevin on a possible action he may be able to rely on under the law of obligations and briefly explain what such an action would entail.arrow_forwardDozier and his wife, daughter, and grandson lived in the house Dozier owned. At the request of the daughter and grandson, Paschall made some improvements to the house. Dozier did not authorize these, but he knew that the improvements were being made and did not object to them. Paschall sued Dozier for the reasonable value of the improvements, but Dozier argued that he had not made any contract for such improvements. Moral of the case? Lessons Learned?arrow_forward
- In Suzanne’s will, she left her home and five acres to her niece, Abrhianna. However, before her death, Suzanne sold the property to Clark, providing a deed in fee simple. At the moment of Suzanne’s death, who owns the property? Select the right answer. a) neither Clark nor Abrhianna own the property. b) Clark and Abrhianna become co-owners of the property. c) Clark owns the property.arrow_forwardRae owned a farm and each summer allowed a neighbor, Fuller, to set up a stand on Rae's property to sell worms to people who drove by on their way to fish in the nearby lake. After 10 years of regularly using the small piece of property, Rae and Fuller had a dispute and Rae forbade Fuller from using his land again. Fuller claimed that he now had a right to continue using the small piece of property as he had in the past, insisting that an easement had been created. Did Fuller's continued use of the property create an easement? Why or why not?arrow_forwardTemco, Inc., conveyed to the Wynns certain property adjoining an apartment complex being developed by Sonnett Realty Company. Although nothing to this effect was contained in the deed, the sales contract gave the purchaser of the property use of the apartment’s swimming pool. Temco’s sales agent also emphasized that use of the pool would be a desirable feature in the event that the Wynns decided to sell the property. Seven years later, the Bunns contracted to buy the property from the Wynns through the latter’s agent, Sonnett Realty. Although both the Wynns and Sonnett Realty’s agent told the Bunns that the use of the apartment’s pool went with the purchased property, neither the contract nor the deed subsequently conveyed to the Bunns so provided. When the Bunns requested pool access passes from Temco and Offutt, the company that owned the apartments, their request was refused. Discuss whether the Bunns have a right to use the apartment’s pool.arrow_forward
- In her will, Teressa granted a life estate to Amos in certain real estate, with remainder to Brenda and Clive in joint tenancy. All the residue of Teressa’s estate was left to Hillman College. While going to Teressa’s funeral, the car in which Amos, Brenda, and Clive were driving was wrecked. Brenda was killed instantly, Clive died a few minutes later, and Amos died on his way to the hospital. Who is entitled to the real estate in question?arrow_forwardIn Oliver V. Brock, what factors did the court consider most significant in determining whether Dr. Brock had a contractual relationship with Oliver?arrow_forwardA buys a residential property from B. the property is being leased to C. in terms of the lease agreement, C (the lessee)m has a right to purchase the property (an option) from B (the original lessor). C wants to excercise his option to purchase against A. Can C excercise his option to purchase against A?arrow_forward
- BUSN 11 Introduction to Business Student EditionBusinessISBN:9781337407137Author:KellyPublisher:Cengage LearningEssentials of Business Communication (MindTap Cou...BusinessISBN:9781337386494Author:Mary Ellen Guffey, Dana LoewyPublisher:Cengage LearningAccounting Information Systems (14th Edition)BusinessISBN:9780134474021Author:Marshall B. Romney, Paul J. SteinbartPublisher:PEARSON
- International Business: Competing in the Global M...BusinessISBN:9781259929441Author:Charles W. L. Hill Dr, G. Tomas M. HultPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education