PROPERTY D SLIDES

Tuesday April 8 Music (to Accompany Williams Island): Pat Benatar: Best Shots (1989) featuring “Hit Me with Your Best Shot” Review Problem 6B (S145): Shenandoah For Plaintiff (Mike/Dom.): McCarten, Rostock, Sattler, Shawn Alts: Oña, Perez For Defendant (Debbie/Serv.): Block, Nelson, Raijman, Schindler Alts: Lehtinen, Alvarez Biscayne Critique due Thu. 10:00 am Today We’ll Meet Until ~9:45 I’ll Talk About Course Selection Process

Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D Review Problem 6B: Shenandoah Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D “[Owner of M’s land] may place and maintain an antenna onto [Debbie’s] barn and run wires from the antenna to [M’s land] to allow [TV] reception for that property.” Time of Grant (1962): Mike gets poor TV reception b/c of valley location Debbie owns neighboring ranch above M’s land Antenna installed; reception still not good; no cable TV 2014: Can M replace antenna w satellite dish?

Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D Review Problem 6B: Shenandoah Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D For P: McCarten, Rostock, Sattler, Shawn (Alts: Oña, Perez) For D: Block, Nelson, Raijman, Schindler (Alts: Lehtinen, Alvarez) 1962: “[Owner of M’s land] may place and maintain an antenna onto [Debbie’s] barn and run wires from the antenna to [M’s land] to allow [TV] reception for that property.” 2014: Can M replace antenna w satellite dish? Arguments from Marcus Cable?

Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D Review Problem 6B: Shenandoah Mike/Dom. = P Debbie/Serv. =D For P: McCarten, Rostock, Sattler, Shawn (Alts: Oña, Perez) For D: Block, Nelson, Raijman, Schindler (Alts: Lehtinen, Alvarez) 1962: “[Owner of M’s land] may place and maintain an antenna onto [Debbie’s] barn and run wires from the antenna to [M’s land] to allow [TV] reception for that property.” 2014: Can M replace antenna w satellite dish? Arguments from Chevy Chase? (incl. Missing/Ambiguous Facts)

NCAA Contest Final Results TOP 7 HALMOUKOS118 MUNROE110 GAID102 KRATZER84 WARREN67 LOPEZ58 MCCARTEN48 BOTTOM 7 GEORGE13 HOFFMAN13 ROSTOCK13 CESPEDES11 HUNTER9 FALK7 KIRKLAND2

Chapter 6: Easements 1.Overview & Terminology 2.Interpreting Language a.Easement v. Fee b.Scope of Express Easements 3.Implied Easements a.By Estoppel, cont’d b.By Implication and/or Necessity c.By Prescription

General Rule Easement-by-Estoppel General Rule An owner may be estopped from barring a 2d party access to the owner’s property where 1.The owner apparently allows 2d party to use the property (Apparent License) 2.2d party reasonably and detrimentally relies on this acquiescence Effect in States that Allow Easements-by-Estoppel is that License Becomes Unrevokable Usually little debate about Apparent License, so existence of E-by-E usually turns on reliance.

Easement-by-Estoppel Reasonable & Detrimental Reliance Nelson v. AT&T (Note 3 P851) Easement contained in deed invalid b/c lack of legal formalities. D placed 32 poles & maintained for 30 years. Compare to Stoner re Reliance. – AT&T: Clearer that easement rather than license intended b/c explicit, in writing, & problems w deed arose after O signed – BUT AT&T sophisticated party; should’ve known that deed was invalid & fixed

Easement-by-Estoppel Reasonable & Detrimental Reliance Nelson v. AT&T (Note 3 P851) Easement contained in deed invalid b/c lack of legal formalities. D placed 32 poles & maintained for 30 years. Mass SCt: No easement; AT&T should have known easement not properly created meaning they had a “mere license.” Essentially holds reliance was not reasonable by a sophisticated player.

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? Stoner: “For so long a time as the nature of it calls for.” Means?

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? Stoner: For so long a time as the nature of it calls for. Easy Case: – House Built in Reliance on Access Through Neighbor’s Driveway  E-by-E – New Public Road Built Adjoining Dominant Tenement Creates Alternate Access – Use of House No Longer Relies on Driveway; E-by-E Ends

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? Stoner: For so long a time as the nature of it calls for. What does this mean for an irrigation ditch?

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? Stoner: For so long a time as the nature of it calls for. What does this mean for an irrigation ditch? – So long as irrigation remains useful to Dominant Tenement? – So long as no cheap alternatives?

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? Stoner: For so long a time as the nature of it calls for. What does this mean for hypo in Note 4: House built in reliance on E-by-E burns down. Can owner rebuild?

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? House built in reliance on E-by-E burns down. Can owner rebuild? See quote from Rerick in Stoner (middle P849): “The right to rebuild [a mill] in the case of destruction or dilapidation and to continue the business on its original footing may have been in fact as necessary to his safety, and may have been an inducement of the particular investment in the first instance.”

Duration/Termination Easement-by-Estoppel Duration/Termination N.4 (P851-52): How Long Does an E-by-E Last? House built in reliance on E-by-E burns down. Can owner rebuild? See quote from Rerick in Stoner (middle P849): – Could read to allow absolute right to rebuild – BUT may turn on evidence of nature of reliance Connection between safety and dilapidation Return on investment w/o rebuilding? (insurance $)

SEWAGE PIPE HYPOTHETICAL: Danielle buys Lot #2 from Owner of Lot #1 (No House on #2 but Sewage Pipe in Place)

Easement-by-Estoppel Sewage Pipe Hypothetical Danielle buys Lot #2 from Owner of Lot #1 – No House on #2 but Sewage Pipe in Place – D makes clear she intends to build house on Lot #2 Owner of Lot #1 doesn’t object to use of sewer line until after house on #2 is complete & connected. Assume no other easy way to connect to sewer. Is D’s Reliance on O’s Silence While House is Constructed Reasonable? If so, will yield E-by-E in states that allow

ARCHES: DQ6.07 DELICATE ARCHES

Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Easement-by-Estoppel (Arches) Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Should We Allow E-by-E?: Relevant Concerns?

Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Easement-by-Estoppel (Arches) Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Should We Allow E-by-E?: Relevant Concerns Doctrine undermines Statute of Frauds People making significant investments should make sure of legal rights before relying on mere license. BUT: Neighbors don’t typically create signed writings for all agreements – People can take offense (My word isn’t good enough?) – Cf. Border disputes in adverse possession).

Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Easement-by-Estoppel Policy Considerations (DQ6.07) Should We Allow E-by-E?: Possible Results (1) Whenever there’s reasonable and detrimental reliance. (Many States) –OR– (2) Only after compensation paid (A Few Cases) –OR– (3) Never (Many States) Qs on Easements by Estoppel?

Chapter 6: Easements 1.Overview & Terminology 2.Interpreting Language a.Easement v. Fee b.Scope of Express Easements 3.Implied Easements a.By Estoppel b.By Implication and/or Necessity c.By Prescription

Overview Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Overview Both Arise from Split of Larger Parcel Different Requirements Sometimes Same Facts Can Give Rise to Both.

Overview Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Overview Both Arise from Split of Larger Parcel; Different Requirements but Sometimes Same Facts Can Give Rise to Both E-by-I : Parties Intend that Prior Existing Use Should Continue Objective Look for Objective Evidence of Intent; Not Secret Subjective Belief Default Rule: Default Rule: Clear statement that not intended precludes E-by-I.

Overview Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Overview Both Arise from Split of Larger Parcel; Different Requirements But Sometimes Same Facts Can Give Rise to Both E-by-I : Parties Intend that Prior Existing Use Should Continue Objective Look for Objective Evidence of Intent; Not Secret Subjective Belief Default Rule: Default Rule: Clear statement that not intended precludes E-by-I. E-by-N: Split Creates Landlocked Parcel Needing Access Dispute as to Whether Based in Public Policy or (Very Generous Notion of) Intent Resolution of this dispute determines whether E-by-N is default rule or universal policy (See Rev Prob 6I).

Elements: States Vary on Formulation Easement-by-Implication Elements: States Vary on Formulation 1.One parcel is split in two 2.Prior Use (“Quasi-Easement”) 3.Intent to continue prior use 4.*Apparent, visible or reasonably discoverable 5.*Some degree of necessity * Some jurisdictions treat 4 & 5 as separate elements; some treat as evidence of intent

Review Problem 6H (Yellowstone) Easement-by-Implication Review Problem 6H (Yellowstone) For Thursday, Prepare Arguments for Each Party re 1.One parcel is split in two 2.Prior Use (“Quasi-Easement”) 3.Intent to continue prior use 4.*Apparent, visible or reasonably discoverable 5.*Some degree of necessity

Elements Easement-by-Necessity Elements 1.One parcel is split in two 2.Landlock: One resulting parcel is cut off from key access (e.g. to roads or sewer system) by other parcel (alone or in combination with parcels owned by 3d parties). 3.At time parcels split, access necessary to enjoyment of landlocked parcel

Recurring Concerns/Comparisons Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Recurring Concerns/Comparisons Implied-by-Grant v. Implied-by-Reservation Degree of Necessity Notice (of Existence of Eassement) Termination

Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Implied-by-Grant v. Implied-by-Reservation Parcel split into Eastacre and Westacre. Prior Use = Driveway from House on Eastacre across Westacre to main road. Original owner sells East, retains West = by Grant (Claim in Dupont) Original owner sells West, retains East = by Reservation (Claim in Williams Island) Original Owner Simultaneously Sells Both to Different People = by Grant

Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by- Necessity: Implied-by-Grant v. Implied-by-Reservation Some states treat some elements of E-by-I or E-by-N more favorably if “by grant” than “by reservation” Implied-by-Reservation seen as shady: “When I sold you the lot next door, I forgot to mention that I was going to keep using the path to the lake. Oops!”

Easement-by-Implication & Easement-by-Necessity: Degree of Necessity EASEMENTS BY IMPLICATION: Some states: Evidence of intent, but not required Most states: Reasonable necessity required Some states (not FL): Strict necessity required if implied by reservation EASEMENTS BY NECESSITY: Most states: Strict necessity Some Legal Tests/Examples for Reasonable & Strict Necessity in Cases and Note 3 (P860-61)

Easement-by-Implication: Notice Subsequent purchasers of servient tenement only bound to continue easement if notice of its existence at time of purchase Actual Notice/Knowledge (Fact Q): Did buyer know about easement? Inquiry Notice (Legal Q): Sufficient info to create duty in reasonable buyer to ask? – Often Sufficient: Path/road going to property line – Courts sometimes stretch to find inquiry notice: should have been aware that pipes underground might connect, etc. Usually won’t be notice from public land records b/c documents unlikely to refer to implied easement.

APPROACHING COURSE SELECTION

COURSE SELECTION: PREPARATION Become Familiar with Registration Procedures Especially Wait List (Ask Qs!!) Become Familiar with Graduation Requirements Read Course Descriptions Talk to People re Courses & Profs (including Me after class & in Office Hours)

COURSE SELECTION: 2L FALL SEMESTER Not Sophomore Year in College – No Need to Get All “Basic Courses” Out of the Way Early – No Need to Take Especially Heavy Load Unlikely to Get Everything You Want – 3Ls Will Fill or Nearly Fill Many Classes – Later 2L Slots Have Even Fewer Options – Check in Advance & Prepare Alternatives

COURSE SELECTION: HOW TO CHOOSE 1.Becoming a Well-Rounded Lawyer 2.Resume Management 3.Taking Care of Yourself

Becoming a Well-Rounded Lawyer Administrative Law: Business Associations: Evidence: Federal Income Tax I: Substantive Criminal Law: Trusts & Estates: U.S. Constitutional Law II: At Least One Comparative/International Course (E.g., International Law, Comparative Law, International Business Transactions) At Least One Course Addressing a Complex Statute: (E.g., Commercial Law, Bankruptcy, Environmental Law, Employment or Housing Discrimination)

Becoming a Well-Rounded Lawyer The Bar Exam: Becoming a Practicing Lawyer Bar Review Courses Will Give You Version You Need for Bar Mildly Helpful to Have Had the Material Before Matters Less the Better You Are at Law School Exams

RESUME MANAGEMENT Preparing for a Specialty Area – Not a College Major – Check Lists On Registrar’s Page – Talk to Faculty in Area Putting Yourself in the Best Light

RESUME MANAGEMENT Preparing for a Specialty Area Putting Yourself in the Best Light – Alternate Forms of Evaluation Writing Papers Lawyering Skills – Schedules That Facilitate Your Doing Well During Semester Four or More Exams in December

TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF Balance in Course Selection # of Exams or Papers Likely Size of Classes One Subject You Really Want to Take Comfortable Daily/Weekly Schedule Choose Professors Rather Than Course Titles

FINAL POINT

NOT FINAL POINT: Registration is NOT a Crucial Turning Point in Your Life You are Picking One Set of Elective Classes Three More Opportunities to Fill in Gaps You’ve Done This Before Employers Care Much Less Than You’d Imagine

FINAL POINT: Registration is Not a Crucial Turning Point in Your Life You are Picking One Set of Elective Classes Three More Opportunities to Fill in Gaps You’ve Done This Before Employers Care Much Less Than You’d Imagine Not a Fork But a Spoon