Question: Is an easement of infinite duration unless limited by conditions in the grant?

Answer: Yes. An easement is of infinite duration unless limited by conditions in the grant. An appurtenant easement is automatically transferred with the dominant estate.


Question: A farmer spends substantial money and effort each year to build and maintain a building within a one-acre parcel owned by his neighbor after receiving oral permission to use the land. The neighbor's son later inherits the land and revokes his permission. What happens?

Answer: The court will find for the farmer because an irrevocable license or an equitable easement was created when the farmer expended significant investments and efforts in reliance on the oral license, and the son, as the farmer's heir, is estopped from revoking the license.


Question: Can an oral license become irrevocable?

Answer: Yes. An oral license can become irrevocable if the licensee expends substantial time or money into the property in reliance on the grantor's oral representation, as the licensor will be estopped from revoking the license, making it equivalent to an affirmative easement.


Question: Is an oral license a revocable privilege?

Answer: Yes. An oral license is a revocable privilege.


Question: Does openly using part of a neighbor's land for a footpath for more than 10 years without interruption result in a prescriptive easement?

Answer: Yes. Openly using part of a neighbor's land for a footpath for more than 10 years without interruption results in a prescriptive easement.


Question: If the use of a footpath was exclusive, what could it result in?

Answer: If the use of a footpath was exclusive, it could result in adverse possession of the footpath.


Question: Can a landowner use, impound, or dam any diffuse surface water on his own property?

Answer: Yes. A landowner can use, impound, or dam any diffuse surface water on his own property, so long as the landowner does not maliciously waste water to the detriment of a neighbor.


Question: Is a landowner's oral or written permission for another to use his land a license that can generally be revoked at any time?

Answer: Yes. A landowner's oral or written permission for another to use his land is a license that can generally be revoked at any time.


Question: Does buying season tickets to a sporting arena create a license to enter into the sporting arena that is revocable at will?

Answer: Yes. Buying season tickets to a sporting arena creates a license to enter into the sporting arena that is revocable at will.


Question: Is an adjacent landowner liable for subsidence that would have occurred to the neighboring parcel in an unimproved condition?

Answer: No. An adjacent landowner is only liable for subsidence that would have occurred to the neighboring parcel in an unimproved condition.


Question: Does visible use of an easement by the dominant owner give a subsequent purchaser actual notice of that easement?

Answer: Yes. Visible use of an easement by the dominant owner gives a subsequent purchaser actual notice of that easement, and they will take subject to the easement.


Question: For an express easement, is the existence of a road being used in accordance with the easement sufficient to establish the location of the easement?

Answer: Yes. For an express easement, the existence of a road being used in accordance with the easement is sufficient to establish the location of the easement.


Question: Does a development plan that will dedicate a road to a municipality as a public street give adjacent landowners private easements by implication?

Answer: No. A development plan that will dedicate a road to a municipality as a public street does not give adjacent landowners private easements by implication. Adjacent landowners can only have access once the road is public.


Question: What is a profit a prendre?

Answer: A profit a prendre is a non-possessory interest in land giving the holder the right to take natural resources. It is a property right protected by the due process clause, and the owner of a profit a prendre is entitled to compensation if the property is condemned.


Question: If A has a valid easement over O's land, can O be reimbursed for any damages to the improved land over the easement area if A was acting within the scope of the easement?

Answer: No. O cannot be reimbursed for any damages to the improved land over the easement area if A was acting within the scope of the easement.


Question: Is a right-of-way easement created by express grant extinguished if the need for the easement no longer exists?

Answer: No. A right-of-way easement created by express grant is not extinguished if the need for the easement no longer exists. Easements by express grant remain in effect until terminated by agreement, abandonment, merger, or other legal means.


Question: Can a right-of-way easement whose scope is initially undefined be regarded as defined by the initial use of the easement by the dominant estate?

Answer: Yes. A right-of-way easement whose scope is initially undefined can be regarded as defined by the initial use of the easement by the dominant estate.


Question: Can O get an injunction to stop A from maintaining a valid easement over O's land if O has improved the land over the easement?

Answer: No. O cannot get an injunction to stop A from maintaining the easement, even if O has improved the land over the easement.


Question: If an easement is in the chain of title but not mentioned in a deed, is the owner on record notice of it?

Answer: Yes. Even if a deed does not mention an easement, if the easement is in the chain of title, the owner is on record notice of it.


Question: Can an adjacent landowner erect a building that will obstruct the land owner's view if the land owner does not possess an easement for light, air, or view?

Answer: Yes. An adjacent landowner can erect a building that will obstruct the land owner's view unless zoning or building regulations say otherwise.


Question: Can you acquire an easement by prescription if you have permission to use a road?

Answer: No. If you have permission to use a road, you cannot acquire an easement by prescription, which requires adverse possession elements.


Question: If both parties are using an easement, how will repair costs be handled?

Answer: If both parties are using the easement, the court will apportion repair costs.


Question: Who has the duty to maintain an easement?

Answer: The owner of an easement (dominant tenement) has the duty to maintain the easement and will be liable if failure to maintain it causes unreasonable interference with the use of the servient tenement.


Question: Is the owner of a servient estate ordinarily obligated to repair or maintain an easement?

Answer: No. Ordinarily, the owner of a servient estate is not obligated to repair or maintain an easement.


Question: When is the expense of maintaining a road, driveway, or right-of-way apportioned between dominant and servient owners?

Answer: The expense of maintaining a road, driveway, or right-of-way is apportioned between dominant and servient owners when both use the easement.


Question: Does a beneficial easement that is visible or known to the buyer constitute an encumbrance?

Answer: No. A beneficial easement that is visible or known to the buyer does not constitute an encumbrance, so marketable title is not affected.


Question: Do the benefits of an easement appurtenant pass with transfers of the benefited land, regardless of whether the easement is mentioned in the conveyance?

Answer: Yes. The benefits of an easement appurtenant pass with transfers of the benefited land, regardless of whether the easement is mentioned in the conveyance.


Question: Can a person grant an easement that lasts only a few years?

Answer: Yes. A person can grant an easement that lasts only a few years.


Question: Is the owner of a profit entitled to compensation in a condemnation proceeding even if the profit is non-exclusive?

Answer: Yes. The owner of a profit is entitled to compensation in a condemnation proceeding even if the profit is non-exclusive because a profit is still an interest in land.


Question: Does the expanded use of an easement terminate it?

Answer: No. The expanded use of an easement does not terminate it.


Question: Are window air-conditioning units, lawn mowers, and throw rugs considered fixtures?

Answer: No. Window air-conditioning units, lawn mowers, and throw rugs are not considered fixtures.


Question: What are typical examples of fixtures?

Answer: Typical fixtures include stoves, cabinets, ceiling fans, dishwashers, fireplaces, and wall-to-wall carpeting.


Question: What is a fixture?

Answer: A fixture is any personal property that is so closely associated with real property due to annexation, adaptation, or the intent of the parties that it is regarded as real property. Once an item becomes classified as a fixture, ownership of the item passes to the owner of the real estate, no matter who owned it before it became a fixture.


Question: What are trade fixtures?

Answer: Trade fixtures are items of personal property used by a tenant in a trade or business that have been affixed to the real estate in such a manner that the law would ordinarily treat them as personal property. A tenant is generally entitled to remove trade fixtures upon the termination of a lease, including periodic tenancies created after a tenant holds over.


Question: Are custom drapes designed and made specifically to match the decor of a room considered fixtures?

Answer: Yes. Custom drapes designed and made specifically to match the decor of a room are considered fixtures.


Question: Are items customized to fit into or onto real property considered fixtures?

Answer: Yes. Items customized to fit into or onto real property, such as window screens or storm shutters, are considered fixtures even though they could easily be removed.


Question: Can a tenant remove chattels once they are deemed to be fixtures?

Answer: No. A tenant cannot remove chattels once they are deemed to be fixtures, unless: (1) the landlord gives the tenant permission in writing to remove the fixtures; or (2) the chattel is a trade fixture brought to the premises by the tenant for use in the tenant's particular business or trade.


Question: If a tenant leases a commercial property and receives oral permission from the landlord to install fixtures such as counters, display cases, shelving, and special lighting, can the tenant remove these trade fixtures?

Answer: Yes. The tenant may remove these trade fixtures even if they are bolted to the floor, provided he restores the premises to its prior condition or pays for its restoration. A commercial tenant has the right to remove a trade fixture before the end of the lease as long as no substantial damage would result by its removal.


Question: Does personal property installed by a tenant that attaches to the rented real estate become a fixture if it was the intent of the parties that it remain the tenant's property?

Answer: No. Personal property installed by a tenant that attaches to the rented real estate does not become a fixture if it was the intent of the parties that it remain the tenant's property.


Question: Does a perfected security interest in fixtures or goods have priority over a conflicting interest of an encumbrancer of real property?

Answer: Yes. A perfected security interest in fixtures or goods has priority over a conflicting interest of an encumbrancer of real property if the security interest is perfected before the goods become fixtures and the fixtures are readily removable replacements of domestic appliances that are consumer goods.


Question: If you have a security interest in windows and they are removable, can you take them back if the bank forecloses on the house?

Answer: Yes. If you have a security interest in windows and they are removable, you can take them back if the bank forecloses on the house.


Question: If a restriction exists at the time of purchase, how do courts view the hardship?

Answer: Where the restriction exists at the time of purchase, courts view the hardship as self-created hardship and will not grant the variance or zoning change.


Question: If an owner subdivides his property into two separate parcels, one of which cannot be developed in accordance with zoning requirements, is he entitled to a variance for that parcel later?

Answer: No. He is not entitled to a variance for that parcel later because the hardship is self-created.


Question: What is a variance?

Answer: A variance is an authorized deviation from strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance in an individual case. Parties are entitled to a variance if they will suffer undue hardship if they don't receive the variance and granting the variance will not result in harm to the public.


Question: Can a nonconforming use be enlarged or changed to a different nonconforming use?

Answer: No. A nonconforming use cannot be enlarged or changed to a different nonconforming use.


Question: Can a nonconforming use be legislated out of existence by the use of an amortization period?

Answer: Yes. A nonconforming use may eventually be legislated out of existence by the use of an amortization period, which acts as a grace period, putting owners on fair notice of the law and giving them a fair opportunity to recoup their investment.


Question: If a commercial area is rezoned to a residential area, can an existing commercial use continue in such a rezoned area?

Answer: Yes. An existing commercial use may continue in such a rezoned area.


Question: What is a nonconforming use?

Answer: A nonconforming use is a use of property that was allowed under the zoning regulations at the time the use was established, but due to subsequent zoning changes, is no longer a permitted use. Once in place, a nonconforming use can continue and run with the land.


Question: Can a zoning board grant a variance to a homeowner to permit a daycare service at her home located in an area recently zoned only for residential purposes?

Answer: Yes. A zoning board may grant a variance to a homeowner to permit a daycare service at her home located in an area recently zoned only for residential purposes if the owner demonstrates that without the variance she will suffer an unnecessary hardship regarding the use of the land and nearby properties are already zoned for commercial purposes.


Question: What is the purpose of a variance procedure?

Answer: A variance procedure exists to grant waivers in particular instances when the person subject to the regulation demonstrates that the application of the regulation would create a substantial hardship or violate principles of fairness.


Question: Do regulations that decrease the value of property need to promote an important public purpose and permit continued use of the property?

Answer: Yes. Regulations that decrease the value of property must promote an important public purpose and permit continued use of the property.


Question: If a grantor conveys land to a town 'so long as it is used as a park,' and the town hasn't used the land as a park for 11 years, can the grantor or his heirs claim possession?

Answer: No. The grantor or his heirs cannot claim possession because the town's fee simple determinable automatically came to an end, and with the town's possession being open, notorious, continuous, and adverse for the applicable 10-year period, any action by the grantor or his heirs is now barred by adverse possession.


Question: When does a possibility of reverter become possessory?

Answer: A possibility of reverter becomes possessory automatically when the determinable fee ends.


Question: When does a right of entry require a positive act by the grantor to terminate the fee simple?

Answer: A right of entry requires a positive act by the grantor to terminate the fee simple.


Question: When does the statute of limitations begin to run for a right of entry?

Answer: The statute of limitations for a right of entry begins to run when the grantor attempts to exercise the right and is rebuffed.


Question: When does the statute of limitations for adverse possession start running on the possibility of reverter?

Answer: The statute of limitations for adverse possession starts running on the possibility of reverter as soon as the determinable fee ends.


Question: If two persons act together to acquire title by adverse possession, what is their holding?

Answer: If two persons act together to acquire title by adverse possession, they hold as tenants in common, not as joint tenants.


Question: What happens to the interest in the property when one of two adverse possessors dies?

Answer: When one of two adverse possessors dies, his interest in the property goes to his heirs or devisees rather than the surviving adverse possessor.


Question: A woman obtains title to land by adversely possessing the land for the required period. She feels remorse and then gives express oral waiver to the original owner of her claim to the land. Subsequently, she changes her mind and delivers to her son a validly executed deed. Who owns the land?

Answer: The court will rule that the son now owns the land because an oral waiver of a claim without anything more, such as part performance, is insufficient to release the title to the original owner. The son properly succeeded to the woman's adverse possession title by privity of conveyance, which was in writing as required by the Statute of Frauds.


Question: Does the woman need to sue the original owner in an action to quiet title if the adverse possession ripened?

Answer: No. The woman need not sue the original owner in an action to quiet title since an adverse possession that ripened is sufficient to establish title.


Question: What does the Statute of Frauds require for a contract for the conveyance of real property?

Answer: The Statute of Frauds requires that a contract for the conveyance of real property be in writing.


Question: What permits the enforcement of an oral land sale contract under the Statute of Frauds?

Answer: The part performance exception to the Statute of Frauds permits the enforcement of an oral land sale contract where the buyer takes possession and does some additional act such as making improvements or making payments on the contract.


Question: A neighbor adversely possesses a piece of land by planting and harvesting crops on it, hunting on it, and parking cars on it for 24 of 25 years. The adverse possessor took a one-year vacation in Europe during the 7th year. Is the adverse possession valid?

Answer: No. The adverse possession is interrupted, requiring the adverse possessor to start the clock all over again.


Question: What does a claim for adverse possession require under the common law?

Answer: A claim for adverse possession under the common law requires the possessor to establish that the character of the possession is hostile, actual and exclusive, open and notorious, and continuous for a period of 20 years.


Question: What must be determined to establish if the use is continuous for adverse possession?

Answer: To establish if the use is continuous for adverse possession, it must be determined whether the use is consistent with the type of property involved and if the average owner would use the property all year.


Question: Can a person assert ownership and acquire title through a quiet title action if they adversely possess property through a tenant for ten years, including tacking?

Answer: Yes. A person can assert ownership and acquire title through a quiet title action if they adversely possess property through a tenant for ten years, including tacking.


Question: Is the title of an adverse possessor marketable if the adverse possessor has not quieted title?

Answer: No. If an adverse possessor has not quieted title, the title is unmarketable because it might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss.


Question: What happens if an adverse possessor satisfies the criteria for adverse possession?

Answer: If an adverse possessor satisfies the criteria for adverse possession, the adverse possessor effectively gets title to the land after the statutory period expires.


Question: If an adverse possessor transfers personal property on the land, does the adverse possessor still have title to the land?

Answer: Yes. If an adverse possessor transfers personal property on the land, the adverse possessor still has title to the land.


Question: Who has priority in adverse possession?

Answer: The first possessor has priority over subsequent possessors in adverse possession.


Question: Can a plaintiff adversely possess a private-right-of-way?

Answer: Yes. A plaintiff can adversely possess a private-right-of-way.


Question: If you let your sister use the property while you go away for one year, does this create privity for tacking under adverse possession?

Answer: Yes. Letting your sister use the property while you go away for one year creates privity for tacking under adverse possession.


Question: What does tacking under adverse possession require?

Answer: Tacking under adverse possession requires privity, which can result from contract or blood.


Question: Can one co-tenant bind another co-tenant to a boundary line agreement?

Answer: No. One co-tenant cannot bind another co-tenant to a boundary line agreement.


Question: Does an express or implied agreement between adjoining landowners to fix an uncertain or disputed boundary line have to be in writing?

Answer: No. An express or implied agreement between adjoining landowners to fix an uncertain or disputed boundary line does not have to be in writing because the agreement is not a conveyance.


Question: When is an oral boundary line agreement valid?

Answer: An oral boundary line agreement is valid so long as: (1) there is uncertainty on both sides as to the actual location of the boundary; and (2) there is either an express oral agreement fixing the boundary, or possession for a considerable period.


Question: How is a deed procured by fraud in the execution treated?

Answer: A deed procured by fraud in the execution is treated like a forgery, making it a void deed.


Question: If A tricks O into signing a deed transferring O's property to A by telling him he is signing tax documents, is the deed void or voidable?

Answer: The deed is void because this is the equivalent of a forged deed.


Question: Is a deed procured by fraud voidable if the fraud is in the execution of the deed?

Answer: Yes. A deed procured by fraud is voidable if the fraud is in the execution of the deed.


Question: Is a deed procured by fraud voidable if the fraud is in the inducement?

Answer: Yes. A deed procured by fraud is voidable if the fraud is in the inducement.


Question: Is a deed to a nonexistent or deceased grantee void?

Answer: Yes. A deed to a nonexistent or deceased grantee is void and conveys no title.


Question: Is the grantor's awareness of the grantee's nonexistence or death relevant to the validity of the deed?

Answer: No. The grantor's awareness of the grantee's nonexistence or death is irrelevant, and title will remain in the grantor.


Question: Must a grantee be alive at the time of delivery of the deed?

Answer: Yes. A grantee must be alive at the time of delivery of the deed.


Question: Are express deed restrictions on sales/transfers considered total restraints on alienation?

Answer: Yes. Express deed restrictions on sales/transfers are considered total restraints on alienation.


Question: Are total restraints on alienation of fee simple interests enforceable?

Answer: No. Total restraints on alienation of fee simple interests are uniformly held void and unenforceable.


Question: If the restraint on alienation is limited in time, is it still considered void?

Answer: Yes. If the restraint on alienation is limited in time, it is still considered void if it is a total restraint.


Question: Can a deed be invalid if it is not delivered with the intent that it is presently operative?

Answer: Yes. A deed must be delivered with the intent that it is presently operative, or it is invalid.


Question: If a grantor delivers a deed under which he reserves a right of retrieval and attaches to that delivery the condition that the deed is to become operative only after the grantor's death, is the deed valid?

Answer: No. The grantor's actions are nothing more than an attempt to employ the deed as if it were a will, making it invalid.


Question: If the grantor continues to use the property as if no transfer had occurred, is the deed valid?

Answer: No. If the grantor continues to use the property as if no transfer had occurred, the deed is invalid because it was not delivered with the intent that it is presently operative.


Question: A son sells a farm owned by his father to a friend using a full warranty deed. The son later inherits the farm after the father's death. Who will prevail in an action to quiet title?

Answer: The friend will prevail in an action to quiet title under the doctrine of estoppel by deed because the grantor's title automatically passes to the grantee when the grantor subsequently acquires title, provided that the original deed is a warranty deed that asserts the quality of title.


Question: What happens under the Doctrine of Estoppel by Deed if an individual conveys an interest in land by a warranty deed but does not actually own the land until after the conveyance?

Answer: The title is transferred automatically to the grantee when the grantor acquires it.


Question: A landowner conveys his farm using a warranty deed to a corporation, but the corporation's charter of incorporation was never filed. Who owns the land?

Answer: The deed is void and the landowner still owns the land because a valid deed must be properly executed and delivered, and a delivery to a nonexistent grantee such as a business entity not yet formed makes the deed void.


Question: Does a deed convey title if it does not name an existing identifiable grantee?

Answer: No. A deed does not convey title unless it names an existing identifiable grantee.


Question: What happens if a deed does not designate a grantee with reasonable certainty?

Answer: A deed is not operative if the grantee is not designated with reasonable certainty and a deed which designates a person incapable of taking is void for want of a grantee.


Question: A mother executes a deed sufficient to create a joint tenancy with right of survivorship to her son and his wife. She mails him the deed with a letter that reads, "You can have the house after my death. Don't record it until my death because I want to live here till I die." The wife records it anyway. Who owns the house?

Answer: The court will find that the mother still owns the house in fee simple because the deed was not delivered as she still retained possession and title to the property.


Question: What happens if a grantor delivers a deed and attaches a condition that the deed is to become operative only after the grantor's death?

Answer: The grantor's actions are nothing more than an attempt to employ the deed as if it were a will, making it invalid.


Question: What is required for the delivery of a deed to be valid?

Answer: A deed must be delivered with the intent that it is presently operative or it is invalid.


Question: A man gives a deed to his house to his attorney with the instruction to deliver the deed to his friend upon his death, but reserves the power to take back the deed if he changes his mind. Does the death escrow succeed?

Answer: No. The death escrow fails and the house goes to his intestate heir since he has failed to put the deed beyond his control.


Question: What is required to create a death escrow?

Answer: To create a death escrow, the grantor must put the deed beyond his control, reserving no interest upon delivery.


Question: Is a deed valid if it is properly delivered but never recorded or if the grantor later asks for the deed to be returned?

Answer: Yes. A deed that is properly delivered is valid, even if the deed is never recorded or if the grantor later asks for the deed to be returned.


Question: What are the requirements for a gift of real estate?

Answer: A gift of real estate requires capacity of the grantor, intention of the grantor to make the gift, and completed delivery of a deed to the grantee (acceptance is presumed).


Question: Is an executed deed that has not been delivered due to a condition precedent valid if recorded?

Answer: No. An executed deed that has not been delivered due to a condition precedent is invalid, even if recorded.


Question: What is required for title to be conveyed?

Answer: There must be an actual delivery of a deed for title to be conveyed.


Question: Does the validity of the conveyance of land by deed depend upon consideration being paid?

Answer: No. The validity of the conveyance of land by deed does not depend upon consideration being paid, whether recited or not, and a gratuitous conveyance still transfers good title.


Question: What is the grantor of a warranty deed obligated to pay?

Answer: The grantor of a warranty deed is only obligated to pay the costs that the grantee incurs defending title if the title is indeed defective.


Question: What presumption is raised by the delivery of a deed to a third person for the benefit of a child?

Answer: The delivery of a deed to a third person for the benefit of a child may raise a presumption of delivery to the child.


Question: What happens if a grantee does not accept the delivery of a deed?

Answer: If a grantee does not accept the delivery of a deed, title will not be transferred to the grantee and will remain with the grantor.


Question: What happens when a dedication to a school is made and published?

Answer: A dedication to a school and publishing the dedication creates title in the school.


Question: Can a grantee of a deed sue the grantor for breach if the deed included covenants of general warranty and a cloud on title is subsequently discovered?

Answer: Yes. A grantee of a deed can sue the grantor for breach if the deed included covenants of general warranty and a cloud on title is subsequently discovered.


Question: What can be regarded as a dedication to public use of the streets shown on a development plan?

Answer: The recording of the development plan can be regarded as a dedication to public use of the streets shown on the plan, provided that it can be shown a member of the public accepted the dedication.


Question: If you give someone the authority to complete the terms of a deed, what happens to a previous oral understanding?

Answer: A previous oral understanding may be rendered moot by the agency implied to complete the deed.


Question: Is the destruction of a deed sufficient to cause title to pass back to the grantor?

Answer: No. Destruction of a deed is insufficient to cause title to pass back to the grantor. It must be properly executed, acknowledged, delivered, and accepted.


Question: What will amount to common law dedication of land?

Answer: Any evidence to indicate the donor's intention to dedicate land, and the subsequent acceptance by the public through use, will amount to common law dedication.


Question: What is the presumption when a grantor retains physical possession of the deed?

Answer: When a grantor retains physical possession of the deed, there is a presumption against delivery.


Question: What is the presumption when a grantor transfers physical possession of the deed to the grantee?

Answer: When a grantor transfers physical possession of the deed to the grantee, there is a presumption in favor of delivery.


Question: Can a donee sue for damages for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment?

Answer: No. A donee cannot sue for damages for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment because the donee received the property as a gift.


Question: A deed to all church leaders will fail. Why?

Answer: Grantees in a deed must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed.


Question: Who must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed?

Answer: Grantees in a deed must be clearly identifiable and alive at the time of delivery of the deed.


Question: What happens to a deed that is forged or undelivered?

Answer: A forged or undelivered deed is a nullity and will not transfer ownership of property even if the buyer is a bona fide purchaser.


Question: If T wills Blackacre to A, and the residuary to B, and T then sells Blackacre and buys Whiteacre, who takes all?

Answer: B takes all because the specific bequest of Blackacre was adeemed by extinction.


Question: What is the doctrine of ademption?

Answer: Under the doctrine of ademption, if a specifically devised/particularly named object of real or personal property is not in the testator's estate at the time of death, the gift is adeemed by extinction.


Question: If a validly executed will devises testator's land to his 3 grandchildren as a class gift without a survivorship requirement but a grandchild predeceases the testator and the grandchild has no issue, who takes the land in a state with an anti-lapse statute?

Answer: The two surviving grandchildren will take the land since the state's anti-lapse statute saves a gift only if there is living issue by a predeceased devisee.


Question: What happens if a devisee fails to survive the testator but has no issue in a state with an anti-lapse statute?

Answer: The interest will lapse.


Question: What happens if a person bequeaths a specific piece of real property to his friend in a will, but the friend predeceases the testator?

Answer: The friend's family is not entitled to the property when the testator dies because the specific gift has lapsed.


Question: If O sells numerous lots in a subdivision and imposes residential restrictions on some of them, but one Lot is sold without restrictions, and title to the Lot eventually passes to the defendant who begins building a convenience store on the land, will the owners of other lots in the subdivision be successful in suing the defendant to stop the building of the store?

Answer: Yes. The owners of other lots in the subdivision will be successful because the defendant had constructive notice of the restrictions since the defendant was under a duty to check the title of neighboring lots due to the exclusively residential nature of the neighborhood.


Question: What conditions must be met for restrictive covenants to bind subsequent purchasers of the land?

Answer: Restrictive covenants will bind subsequent purchasers of the land as long as the original parties intended that the agreement will run with the land, and the subsequent purchaser had actual or constructive notice of the restriction.


Question: What constitutes constructive (record) notice of a restriction for a subsequent purchaser?

Answer: If the restriction appears in the purchaser's direct chain of title, this will be sufficient to place him on constructive (record) notice of the restriction.


Question: Will a restriction recorded outside of the direct chain of title constitute constructive notice?

Answer: No. A restriction recorded outside of the direct chain of title will not constitute constructive notice unless the purchaser had a duty to check the title.


Question: Do the recording statutes protect donees, heirs, or devisees?

Answer: No. The recording statutes do not protect donees, heirs, or devisees unless the shelter rule applies.


Question: Who will win in a contest between two donees if the recording statutes do not protect creditors?

Answer: The first grantee conveyed an interest will win since neither is considered a purchaser that is protected by the Recording Acts.


Question: If O conveys by warranty deed to A, a BFP who does not record the deed or enter into possession, and later O conveys by quitclaim deed to B, another BFP who records and enters into possession with no notice of the O to A conveyance, and B later conveys to C who doesn't record but has notice of the O to A conveyance, whose title is superior in a Notice jurisdiction?

Answer: C's title is superior to A's title in a Notice jurisdiction.


Question: In a Notice statute jurisdiction, who prevails over an unrecorded prior owner?

Answer: A subsequent good faith purchaser for value prevails over an unrecorded prior owner so long as the subsequent purchaser did not have notice.


Question: What does the Shelter Rule dictate in a Notice statute jurisdiction?

Answer: The Shelter Rule dictates that the title of a 3rd party who takes from a subsequent purchaser without notice is superior to the title of the unrecorded prior owner.


Question: How can you identify a race statute?

Answer: If the statutory language contains the words “third parties”, it is a race statute.


Question: How can you identify a race-notice statute?

Answer: If the statutory language contains the word “first”, it is a race-notice statute.


Question: If a company obtains a loan for $2 million from a bank that is secured by a mortgage on its warehouse, but the mortgage is not recorded, and then obtains a second loan for $1 million from a private investor that is unsecured, if the company defaults on the unsecured second loan and the investor obtains a court judgment and files a valid judgment lien, if the company then defaults on the first secured loan from the bank (which is then recorded, but was recorded after the investor's judgment), who can enforce its judgment lien on the warehouse under a pure notice recording statute?

Answer: The investor can enforce its judgment lien on the warehouse under a pure notice recording statute over the bank's objection because the judgment lien was recorded before the mortgage, and the judgment creditor had no actual or record notice of the mortgage as required by the statute.


Question: What are the three types of recording statutes?

Answer: The three types of recording statutes (in order of frequency of testing) are notice, race-notice, and race.


Question: What happens in a pure notice jurisdiction to an unrecorded conveyance or other instrument?

Answer: In a pure notice jurisdiction, an unrecorded conveyance or other instrument is invalid as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value and without notice.


Question: What happens if a mortgagee fails to record a mortgage on a property in a notice jurisdiction?

Answer: A subsequent purchaser of the property will take free of the unrecorded mortgage, provided the buyer had no actual or constructive notice of the unrecorded mortgage.


Question: What priority does a creditor who records a valid judgment lien have in a race notice jurisdiction?

Answer: A creditor who records a valid judgment lien has priority over subsequent recorded/unrecorded mortgages or liens.


Question: What happens to a bona fide purchaser of real property for value and without notice of an unrecorded encumbrance?

Answer: A bona fide purchaser of real property for value and without notice of an unrecorded encumbrance takes free of the encumbrance.


Question: What happens to a forged release of a mortgage, even if properly recorded and notarized?

Answer: A forged release of a mortgage is ineffective and will be set aside even if it was relied upon by a bona fide purchaser.


Question: What happens if a creditor records a judgment after the owner sells the property but before the buyer records his deed in a jurisdiction that does not protect creditors?

Answer: A creditor will not have a lien against the property in a jurisdiction that does not protect creditors.


Question: Who will be protected if a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance because the prior conveyance was not in the chain of title?

Answer: A subsequent bona fide purchaser for value will be protected.


Question: Can a deed that is voidable due to mistake or breach of fiduciary duty be set aside if the property has passed to a bona fide purchaser?

Answer: No. A deed that is voidable due to mistake or breach of fiduciary duty can only be set aside if the property has not passed to a bona fide purchaser.


Question: What determines who wins if a grantor conveys a property to two separate grantees?

Answer: The grantee who wins depends on whether the first grantee's deed is deemed recorded in the second grantee's chain of title.


Question: What is a method of governing the recording of deeds that determines priority of title?

Answer: A method of governing the recording of deeds that determines priority of title as definitely as possible is to make time of recording the controlling factor.


Question: What can be considered value in a conveyance?

Answer: The full release of a debt can be considered value, but property received as a security interest for antecedent debt is insufficient.


Question: What happens if a subsequent bona fide purchaser purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance and is the first to record?

Answer: A subsequent bona fide purchaser will be protected if he purchases without actual or record notice of a prior conveyance, provided he is the first to record and purchased the property for value.


Question: How is all authority under a power of attorney construed?

Answer: All authority under a power of attorney is strictly construed so as to exclude the exercise of any unwarranted power.


Question: What does a power of attorney to sell and convey real property include?

Answer: A power of attorney to sell and convey real property is construed to include the power to execute the usual form of deed used to convey realty.


Question: What happens to an unrecorded conveyance in a Notice recording statute?

Answer: An unrecorded conveyance is invalid as against a subsequent BFP for value and without notice.


Question: Who wins in a Notice recording statute in the case of O to A then O to B?

Answer: B wins.


Question: Under a Race-Notice recording statute, when is an unrecorded conveyance invalid?

Answer: Under a Race-Notice recording statute, an unrecorded conveyance is invalid as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser (BFP) for value without notice who records first. The BFP is only protected if he records before the prior transferee or mortgagee.


Question: A gives a mortgage to B on March 10, and B records it on March 18. C buys from A on March 11 and records the deed on March 23. If B and C are both without notice, who wins under a race-notice statute?

Answer: B wins under a race-notice statute.


Question: When is a grantee charged with constructive notice of the contents of deeds of adjacent properties under the Collateral Document Rule?

Answer: Under the Collateral Document Rule, a grantee is charged with constructive notice of the contents of deeds of adjacent properties when all of the properties are derived from a common grantor.


Question: Under the Shelter Rule, when does a person who takes from a BFP prevail?

Answer: Under the Shelter Rule, a person who takes from a BFP will prevail against any interest that the BFP would have prevailed against, even if the transferee has actual knowledge of the prior unrecorded interest.


Question: A forged deed is relied upon by a bona fide purchaser. Does it transfer ownership of the property?

Answer: No. A forged deed is a nullity and will not transfer ownership of property even if the buyer is a bona fide purchaser. Forged documents are ineffective to convey title.


Question: Are forged documents effective to convey title even if properly recorded and notarized and relied upon by bona fide purchasers?

Answer: No. Forged documents, even if properly recorded and notarized and relied upon by bona fide purchasers, are ineffective to convey title.


Question: A conveys to B but tells B to wait before recording. A then conveys to C who promptly records. B records later. C conveys to a BFP. Is B's recorded deed within the chain of title?

Answer: No. B's recorded deed is outside the chain of title as far as the BFP is concerned because the deed was recorded late.


Question: If a deed is recorded late, is it within the chain of title?

Answer: No. If a deed is recorded late, it is outside the chain of title.


Question: Are bona fide purchasers protected by forgery?

Answer: No. Bona fide purchasers are not protected by forgery.


Question: If someone is living on the land, is a subsequent purchaser charged with notice?

Answer: Yes. If someone is living on the land, a subsequent purchaser is charged with notice because a purchaser should check the land he is purchasing.


Question: Must a good faith purchaser be a purchaser for value?

Answer: Yes. A good faith purchaser must be a purchaser for value. A purchaser is considered for value if they exchange a substantial sum for the property.


Question: You pay $50,000 for a property worth $100,000. Are you a purchaser for value?

Answer: Yes. You are a purchaser for value if you pay $50,000 for a property worth $100,000 because a good faith purchaser must be a purchaser for value, which is satisfied by exchanging a substantial sum for the property.


Question: Are donees protected by the recording statutes?

Answer: No. Donees are not protected by the recording statutes and thus can be subject to a covenant even if they did not have notice.


Question: A inherits property from O, who had obtained an owner's title insurance policy naming O as the insured. Does A have coverage under the owner's policy?

Answer: Yes. A has coverage since heirs of an insured are deemed to have continued coverage under an owner's policy of title insurance.


Question: O obtains an owner's title insurance policy naming O as the insured. O later sells the property to A who does not buy title insurance. Does A have a claim against the title insurance purchased by O?

Answer: No. A has no claim against the title insurance purchased by O because the policy only protects the person who owns it, not subsequent purchasers.


Question: What is an owner's title insurance policy?

Answer: An owner's title insurance policy is an agreement that the title insurance company will defend against and pay losses involved in any claim covered by the policy's terms, as long as the buyer or the buyer's heirs or devisees own an interest in the property. The policy protects only the person who owns it, not subsequent purchasers.


Question: Does an owner's policy of title insurance cover subsequent purchasers?

Answer: No. The policy only covers immediate owners and does not run with the land to protect subsequent purchasers, meaning a later buyer must get his own title insurance policy.


Question: A buyer of real property is successfully sued by a subsequent grantee on a title covenant he made in a warranty deed. Can the buyer recover from his owner's title insurance policy?

Answer: Yes. The buyer may recover from his owner's title insurance policy if he is successfully sued by a subsequent grantee on a title covenant he made in a warranty deed.


Question: Does an owner's policy of title insurance continue to protect the owner if successfully sued on a title covenant in a future conveyance?

Answer: Yes. An owner's policy of title insurance continues to protect the owner if successfully sued on a title covenant in a future conveyance.


Question: Is an abstract company liable if they fail to uncover the existence of an easement in the chain of title?

Answer: Yes. An abstract company is liable if they fail to uncover the existence of an easement in the chain of title.


Question: O conveys a life estate to A with remainder to B. A later conveys her interest to C as a fee simple absolute by warranty deed that is promptly recorded. B later transfers his remainder interest to A. Who now owns a fee simple absolute interest in the land?

Answer: C now owns a fee simple absolute interest in the land due to the doctrine of estoppel by deed.


Question: What is the doctrine of estoppel by deed?

Answer: The doctrine of estoppel by deed precludes individuals from arguing in court a position counter to what that person stated in a previous deed. It most frequently arises where someone deeded property they did not own, and later they are involved in a dispute involving that property.


Question: Does the doctrine of estoppel by deed apply if a grantor does not have title at the time of conveyance but subsequently obtains title?

Answer: Yes. If a grantor does not have title at the time of conveyance but subsequently obtains title, the doctrine of estoppel by deed applies and the grantor must then convey the property to the grantee.


Question: If a properly filed judgment becomes a lien on real property owned or subsequently acquired by the person against whom the judgment is rendered, does a lien exist if the judgment was filed after the property is sold?

Answer: No. No lien will exist if the judgment was filed after the property is sold.


Question: What happens if the co-tenant's title is foreclosed at a tax sale?

Answer: Courts will find that a fiduciary obligation exists between the co-tenants. If one co-tenant buys the property at such a sale, the other co-tenants can acquire the same interest they previously held by promptly paying their contribution.


Question: When does the After-Acquired Title Doctrine apply?

Answer: The After-Acquired Title Doctrine applies when a person executes a deed purporting to convey an estate in land which he does not have or which is larger than he has, and then acquires this land, at which time title passes to the grantee by estoppel.


Question: Is a judgment creditor a Bona Fide Purchaser?

Answer: No. A judgment creditor is not a Bona Fide Purchaser.


Question: Does a judgment lien run with the land?

Answer: Yes. A judgment lien runs with the land and is binding on subsequent owners who have notice of it.


Question: If a lien is filed on the property of a co-tenant and a partition by judicial sale is performed, is the other co-tenant's interest affected?

Answer: No. The lien only affects the portion of the proceeds of the indebted co-tenant and does not affect the other co-tenant's interest.


Question: Does a recorded contract trump a later filed judgment lien?

Answer: Yes. A recorded contract (as opposed to a deed) trumps a later filed judgment lien.


Question: If a judgment places a lien on property owned or subsequently acquired in favor of the winner of the judgment, does a lien exist if it is filed after the property is sold?

Answer: No. No lien will exist if the lien is filed after the property is sold.


Question: An agent finds a buyer who offers less than the seller's minimum sales price stated in the brokerage agreement. Is the agent entitled to a commission if the seller refuses to sell at the lower price?

Answer: No. The agent is not entitled to a commission if the seller refuses to sell at the lower price, even if the difference is just $100. A real estate broker or agent earns their commission only when they produce a ready, willing, and able buyer who has made an offer conforming with the seller's reasonable requirements.


Question: When does a real estate broker or agent earn their commission?

Answer: A real estate broker or agent earns their commission when they produce a ready, willing, and able buyer who has made an offer conforming with the seller's reasonable requirements.


Question: Is a real estate broker a fiduciary?

Answer: Yes. A real estate broker is a fiduciary under an obligation of undivided service and loyalty to the principal and must act in the highest good faith toward the principal, precluding the broker from obtaining any advantage over the principal in any transaction.


Question: Must a broker disclose if a prospective purchaser is a relative, employee, or partner of the broker?

Answer: Yes. A broker must disclose if a prospective purchaser is a relative, employee, or partner of the broker, and no sale to or purchase from such persons may be concluded without the principal's full knowledge and consent.


Question: The seller finds that his brother is interested in purchasing the house and accepts the brother's offer within the listing period. Is the seller obligated to pay the broker the commission?

Answer: Yes. The seller is obligated to pay the broker the commission even though the broker or agent did nothing to procure the buyer. Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, a broker or agent is entitled to a commission if anyone (including the seller) procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period.


Question: Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, is a broker or agent entitled to a commission if anyone procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period?

Answer: Yes. Under an exclusive-right-to-sell listing agreement, a broker or agent is entitled to a commission if anyone (including the seller) procures a ready, willing, and able buyer during the listing period.


Question: When a contract does not contain a time-of-the-essence clause, what is required to make time of the essence?

Answer: When a contract does not contain a time-of-the-essence clause, the party seeking to make time of the essence must give reasonable notice, provide a clear, distinct, and unequivocal notification of an intent to perform, and fix a reasonable time within which the other party may perform before a default results. What is reasonable depends on the circumstances of each case.


Question: Can a vendee who breaches a real estate contract without lawful excuse recover the down payment if the contract is silent about liquidated damages?

Answer: No. A vendee who breaches a real estate contract without lawful excuse generally cannot recover the down payment if the contract is silent about liquidated damages. The seller may retain the entire down payment if the seller's actual losses exceed the amount of the earnest money.


Question: Can an executory contract for the sale or exchange of real estate be rescinded by mutual oral agreement?

Answer: Yes. An executory contract for the sale or exchange of real estate may be rescinded by mutual oral agreement because the statute of frauds is held to apply only to the initial creation of the contract, and subsequent changes may be by mutual parol agreement.


Question: Can real estate contracts, including option contracts, be assigned?

Answer: Yes. Real estate contracts, including option contracts, can be assigned if there is no express provision against assignment. If the contract is validly assigned, the assignee is entitled to specific performance if the other party breaches.


Question: A tenant sends an e-mail to his landlord that reads, 'I will buy your building for $100,000. Signed/Tenant's name.' The landlord sends an e-mail that reads, 'OK. Must close in 90 days. Signed/Landlord's name.' Can the tenant sue for specific performance if he tenders full payment but the landlord refuses to convey?

Answer: Yes. The tenant can sue for specific performance because the email messages serve as a sufficient memorandum under the statute of frauds, which requires a contract for the sale of land to contain the parties identities, a sufficient description of the land, the parties intent to sell and buy, adequate signatures, and a price term.


Question: What must a memorandum contain to constitute sufficient evidence of a contract for the sale of land?

Answer: A memorandum must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged, identify the parties, state the price, and describe the land.


Question: Can a buyer compel specific performance despite missing the exact closing date?

Answer: Yes. In a land conveyance contract, the buyer can compel specific performance despite missing the exact closing date if there was no time of the essence clause or special circumstances.


Question: A written contract for the sale of real property fails to adequately describe which specific part of the seller's 500-acre land is to be sold. The parties agree in writing to determine which part to sell before they perform the contract. Is the contract enforceable?

Answer: No. The contract is still unenforceable as it fails to meet the statute of frauds which requires a sale of interest in land to be evidenced by one or more writings containing all the essential terms including the description of the land.


Question: What is an essential element for a valid and enforceable real estate contract?

Answer: An essential element for a valid and enforceable real estate contract is an accurate description of the real property to be conveyed. The description can be by street address, full legal description, reference to a public map, or by a plat attached to the contract, or a combination thereof.


Question: A real estate contract contains a reasonable liquidated damages provision along with a time of the essence clause based on the earnest money deposit. The buyer fails to close on the scheduled closing date. Is this a material breach?

Answer: Yes. This is a material breach and the seller may retain the earnest money deposit.


Question: If a buyer breaches the real estate contract, can the seller retain the buyer's earnest money deposit as liquidated damages?

Answer: Yes. If a buyer breaches the real estate contract, the seller can retain the buyer's earnest money deposit as liquidated damages, provided it is a reasonable amount no higher than 10% of the sales price.


Question: What is an exception to the Statute of Frauds for the transfer of an interest in land?

Answer: The doctrine of part performance is an exception to the Statute of Frauds for the transfer of an interest in land. It requires proof that the buyer paid all or part of the purchase price and also either possessed the premises or constructed on the premises.


Question: Must transfers of interests in land be in writing under the Statute of Frauds?

Answer: Yes. Generally, transfers of interests in land must be in writing under the Statute of Frauds, and proof of oral agreements is not allowed.


Question: Is a verbal agreement by tenants in common for the property to pass to the survivor if one of them dies valid?

Answer: No. A verbal agreement by tenants in common for the property to pass to the survivor if one of them dies is invalid because the Statute of Frauds applies.


Question: In a contract to purchase or sell real estate, must the description of the property be sufficient to identify and locate the parcel of land?

Answer: Yes. In a contract to purchase or sell real estate, the description of the property must be sufficient to enable the court to identify and locate the parcel of land definitely and with certainty, so a discrepancy in area is not fatal.


Question: Can the description of the property in a contract to purchase or sell real estate be vague?

Answer: No. The description of the property in a contract to purchase or sell real estate cannot be vague. It must be sufficient to enable the court to identify and locate the parcel of land definitely and with certainty.


Question: Can the seller of real property enforce specific performance against a buyer who breaches?

Answer: Yes. The seller of real property can enforce specific performance against a buyer who breaches.


Question: Is performing one day late a material breach if the contract is time of the essence?

Answer: Yes. If a contract is time of the essence, performing just one day late is a material breach that excuses the other party's duty.


Question: What is an Accord and Satisfaction?

Answer: An Accord and Satisfaction is where one party to a contract agrees to receive a lesser performance than called for by the contract in order to avoid complete default or to resolve the dispute.


Question: What happens when an accord is satisfied?

Answer: An accord suspends the original obligation, which is discharged when the accord is satisfied. If the debtor breaches the accord, the creditor can sue under the original obligation.


Question: How can a time of the essence clause be phrased?

Answer: A time of the essence clause can simply say, 'This Contract is null and void if not performed by a Certain Day.'


Question: Can a party to a contract notify the other party at a later date that time is of the essence?

Answer: Yes. A party to a contract can notify the other party at a later date that time is of the essence, and the other party must comply as long as notice is given a reasonable time prior to the date for performance.


Question: What duty does a seller have in a land sale contract?

Answer: In every land sale contract, the seller has a duty to convey marketable title to the buyer at closing unless the parties agree otherwise. A title is marketable if the seller has a fee simple, the title is free from any encumbrances, and the buyer is entitled to possession.


Question: A right-of-way easement reduces the value of the property. Does it render title unmarketable?

Answer: Yes. An encumbrance such as a right-of-way easement that reduces the value of the property renders title unmarketable.


Question: The installation of utilities is an easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land. Does it render title unmarketable?

Answer: No. An easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land, such as the installation of utilities, does not render title unmarketable.


Question: What circumstances render title unmarketable?

Answer: The three circumstances that will render title unmarketable are adverse possession, encumbrances, and zoning violations. An encumbrance that reduces the value of the property renders title unmarketable, but an easement that is obviously visible and beneficial to the land does not render title unmarketable.


Question: A buyer agrees to buy undeveloped land for commercial purposes with the contract specifying a conveyance by a warranty deed without exceptions but fails to mention the quality of title. The buyer then discovers a restrictive covenant limiting the use of the land to residential purposes only. Can the buyer cancel the contract?

Answer: Yes. The buyer may cancel the contract because the seller has a duty to transfer a marketable title at the time of closing, and an encumbrance such as a restrictive covenant that has not been waived or removed by the closing date makes the title unmarketable.


Question: Is there an implied obligation to convey marketable title in a real estate contract?

Answer: Yes. In the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, there is an implied obligation to convey marketable title in a real estate contract. The title does not have to be marketable until the closing date, although the buyer can waive his right to marketable title.


Question: Does title have to be marketable before the closing date?

Answer: No. Title does not have to be marketable until the closing date, meaning that mortgages or liens on the property can be paid off at the closing.


Question: Can a buyer waive his right to marketable title?

Answer: Yes. A buyer can waive his right to marketable title, but the seller cannot.


Question: Can an easement on the property make the title unmarketable?

Answer: Yes. An easement on the property can make the title unmarketable.


Question: If a real estate contract is silent as to quality of title, is marketable title implied?

Answer: Yes. If a real estate contract is silent as to quality of title, marketable title is implied.


Question: A property has no access to a public right of way. If the buyer does not object prior to his acceptance of the deed, does the buyer have recourse against the seller?

Answer: No. If a property has no access to a public right of way and the buyer does not object prior to his acceptance of the deed, the buyer has no recourse against the seller because even a warranty deed does not covenant against lack of access.


Question: If title to a property is unmarketable, when must the buyer object?

Answer: If title to a property is unmarketable, the buyer must object prior to his acceptance of the deed, because under the doctrine of merger, the deed then becomes the sole measure of the parties' rights and liabilities.


Question: Is title to property unmarketable if it is subject to a covenant or condition containing a right of re-entry or a possibility of reverter?

Answer: Yes. If property being sold is subject to a covenant or condition containing a right of re-entry or a possibility of reverter, the title to the property is unmarketable.


Question: Can a buyer sue for unmarketable title under a contract theory after the deed is delivered and accepted?

Answer: No. Even though marketable title is implied in a contract for the sale of land, after the deed is delivered and accepted, the buyer cannot sue for unmarketable title under a contract theory.


Question: Is a vendor of real estate required to deliver marketable title before closing?

Answer: No. A vendor of real estate is not required to deliver marketable title until closing, even in installment contracts where there is a lien on the property.


Question: Can a buyer refuse to accept a deed if the contract is 'subject to easements, covenants, and restrictions of record' and the seller burdens the property after contract with an easement?

Answer: Yes. A buyer can refuse to accept a deed if the contract is 'subject to easements, covenants, and restrictions of record' and the seller burdens the property after contract with an easement.


Question: Is a real estate title unmarketable if it contains substantial defects such as violations of zoning ordinances?

Answer: Yes. A real estate title is unmarketable if it contains substantial defects such as violations of zoning ordinances which might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss.


Question: Is a real estate title unmarketable if it contains governmental building restrictions?

Answer: Yes. A real estate title is unmarketable if it contains governmental building restrictions which might cause a prospective purchaser to suffer litigation and possible loss.


Question: Will a court imply an obligation to convey marketable title in a land sale contract if the contract is silent on this issue?

Answer: Yes. In a land sale contract, an obligation to convey marketable title will be implied by the court if the contract is silent on this issue.


Question: Is title unmarketable if it is uncertain that a lot is subject to building restrictions?

Answer: Yes. If it is uncertain that a lot is subject to building restrictions, the title is unmarketable.


Question: Is title considered unmarketable if it is subject to an unreasonably burdensome risk of litigation?

Answer: Yes. Title which is subject to an unreasonably burdensome risk of litigation is considered 'unmarketable'.


Question: Do encroachments of a significant dimension make a property unmarketable?

Answer: Yes. Encroachments of a significant dimension on the subject property or onto adjacent land make a property unmarketable.


Question: Do violations of zoning ordinances make a property title unmarketable?

Answer: Yes. The violation of zoning ordinances makes a property title unmarketable.


Question: Is title marketable if there is no tangible proof that the property has been acquired by adverse possession?

Answer: No. Absent tangible proof that the property has been acquired by adverse possession, title is not marketable.


Question: If one of the parties to a contract for the sale of land dies, how are their interests treated under the doctrine of equitable conversion?

Answer: If one of the parties to a contract for the sale of land dies, under the doctrine of equitable conversion, the seller's interest is personal property and the buyer is treated as the owner of the land.


Question: O, owner of Blackacre, contracts to sell Blackacre to A for $10,000. Before closing, O dies intestate. By the applicable intestacy statute, B succeeds to O's real property and C succeeds to O's personal property. Who is entitled to the $10,000 when it is paid?

Answer: C is entitled to the $10,000 when it is paid, and B takes nothing because under equitable conversion, the seller's interest is personal property and the buyer is treated as the owner of the land.


Question: A seller's house burns down prior to closing and no one insured the house. Who bears the risk of loss?

Answer: The buyer would have to pay the contract price because the risk of loss passes to the buyer when the contract is fully executed, even if the buyer does not take possession until the closing.


Question: Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, when does the risk of loss pass to the buyer?

Answer: Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, the risk of loss passes to the buyer when the contract is fully executed, even if the buyer does not take possession until the closing.


Question: Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, when does the buyer become the equitable owner of the land?

Answer: Upon the execution of the contract, the buyer becomes the equitable owner of the land and bears the risk of loss, unless there is a statute to the contrary.


Question: If the seller dies before closing, how are the proceeds from the sale regarded under the principle of equitable conversion?

Answer: The proceeds from the sale are regarded as personal property if the seller dies before closing, under the principle of equitable conversion.


Question: Under the principle of equitable conversion, how do courts treat the signing of the contract?

Answer: Under the principle of equitable conversion, courts treat the signing of the contract as vesting in the purchaser equitable ownership of the land. If the seller dies before closing, the proceeds from the sale are regarded as personal property.


Question: Under the principle of equitable conversion, what happens if the contract has been executed and the buyer dies before closing?

Answer: If the contract has been executed and the buyer dies before closing, the buyer's heirs may specifically enforce the agreement under the principle of equitable conversion.


Question: If a fire occurs prior to closing, who bears the risk of loss under the doctrine of equitable conversion?

Answer: If a fire occurs prior to closing, the risk of loss falls on the buyer, even if the seller is in possession of the property at the time of the fire, unless the contract states otherwise.


Question: After a contract is signed, who is the owner of the land?

Answer: After a contract is signed, the buyer is the owner of the land, subject to the condition that he pays for it at the closing.


Question: Under the doctrine of equitable conversion, if the seller dies after the contract is made but before closing, who receives the proceeds of the sale if the seller's will gives his personal property to A and his real property to B?

Answer: A will receive the proceeds of the sale because equitable title is with the buyer, not B.


Question: If a buyer dies after signing the contract but before closing, can the buyer's heirs enforce the contract?

Answer: Yes. If a buyer dies after signing the contract but before closing, the buyer's heirs can enforce the contract.


Question: Under the majority view of equitable conversion, if the buyer dies, are the buyer's heirs entitled to specific performance?

Answer: Yes. Under the majority view of equitable conversion, the buyer's heirs are entitled to specific performance (and not rescission), unless the buyer's existence was necessary for the performance of the contract.


Question: If the seller dies before closing, how are the proceeds from the sale considered?

Answer: If the seller dies before closing, the proceeds from the sale are considered the personal property of the seller.


Question: Is a right of first refusal within the Statute of Frauds?

Answer: Yes. A Right of First Refusal is within the Statute of Frauds and therefore must be in writing.


Question: If a seller discloses to the buyer that the house had been treated for termites but fails to disclose that permanent termite damage existed in the house, is the seller liable?

Answer: Yes. If a seller discloses to the buyer that the house had been treated for termites but fails to disclose that permanent termite damage existed in the house, the seller will be found liable.


Question: If a seller is unaware that the house is infested with termites, can the seller be found liable?

Answer: No. If a seller is unaware that the house is infested with termites, the seller cannot be found liable.


Question: Is a seller of real property liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects under the modern majority rule?

Answer: Yes. Under the modern majority rule, a seller of real property is liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects, and 'As is' language will not protect a seller from tort claims based on nondisclosure of significant latent defects known to the seller.


Question: A seller inherits a house she has never seen and agrees to sell it 'As is' to a buyer. The buyer later discovers heavy termite damage in the house. Does the buyer have a claim against the seller?

Answer: No. If a seller inherits a house she has never seen and agrees to sell it 'As is' to a buyer and conveys title to the buyer using a full warranty deed, if the buyer later discovers heavy termite damage in the house, the buyer has no claim against the seller since the house was sold 'As is' and the seller made no misrepresentations regarding the condition of the house.


Question: Under the modern majority rule, is a seller of real property liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects?

Answer: Yes. Under the modern majority rule, a seller of real property is liable for material misrepresentations or failing to disclose latent material defects, and 'As is' language will not protect a seller from tort claims based on nondisclosure of significant latent defects known to the seller.


Question: When a deed is accepted, what happens to the contract terms contained in the land sale agreement?

Answer: When a deed is accepted, the contract terms that are contained in the land sale agreement will merge into the deed.


Question: What happens to the implied contractual covenant to convey marketable title when the deed is accepted?

Answer: The implied contractual covenant to convey marketable title is superseded by the doctrine of merger when the deed is accepted.


Question: Can an internet service provider be liable if they negligently provide services to their customers?

Answer: Yes. An internet service provider may be liable if they negligently provide services to their customers.


Question: Does a publisher that publishes information to the general public owe a duty to the public at large?

Answer: No. A publisher or other information provider that publishes information to the general public owes no duty to the public at large because the relationship is highly attenuated.


Question: In a negligence action, what factors do courts analyze to determine whether a duty exists?

Answer: In a negligence action, to determine whether a duty exists, courts analyze several factors, including the legal relationship between the parties, the foreseeability of injury, the likelihood of injury, and public policy considerations.


Question: A plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven. Is the store liable if this is the only evidence available?

Answer: No. If a plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven, and this is the only evidence available in his negligence action against the store, the store can successfully move for summary judgment against the plaintiff since there is no evidence of negligence that can be attributed to the store.


Question: If a plaintiff's house burns down from a fire that appears to have started in his toaster oven, can the plaintiff resort to res ipsa loquitur if the store did not have exclusive control over the instrumentality?

Answer: No. The plaintiff cannot resort to res ipsa loquitur if the store did not have exclusive control over the instrumentality.


Question: What must a plaintiff establish to make a prima facie case of negligence?

Answer: In order to establish a prima facie case of negligence, a plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty owed by a defendant to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty, that such breach was a proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff, and damages suffered by the plaintiff.


Question: A truck driver stops to help after A's car suffers a tire blowout and then gets hit by another speeding car. Can the negligent tire manufacturer be held liable for the truck driver's injuries?

Answer: Yes. The negligent tire manufacturer can be held liable for the truck driver's injuries because the truck driver was not a professional rescuer.


Question: Does a tortfeasor owe a duty of care to a professional rescuer for injury sustained by the very negligence that occasioned the rescuer's presence?

Answer: No. A tortfeasor does not owe a duty of care to a professional rescuer for injury that was sustained by the very negligence that occasioned the rescuer's presence and that was within the scope of the hazards inherent in the rescuer's duties.


Question: Under the rescue doctrine, who is liable for the harm caused to a victim and a person injured while rescuing that victim?

Answer: Under the rescue doctrine, if a tortfeasor creates a circumstance that places the tort victim in danger, the tortfeasor is liable not only for the harm caused to the victim, but also the harm caused to any person injured in an effort to rescue that victim.


Question: A person with no history of kidney problems suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills. Can a jury conclude that the plaintiff was injured due to the pharmacist's negligence?

Answer: Yes. If a person with no history of kidney problems suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills, a jury can reasonably conclude that the plaintiff would not have been injured but for the pharmacist's negligence.


Question: Can circumstantial evidence be used to show that a defendant breached a duty of care in the absence of direct evidence of negligence?

Answer: Yes. In the absence of direct evidence of negligence, circumstantial evidence (evidence of one fact from which another fact may be inferred) can sometimes be used to show that the defendant breached a duty of care if the claim is supported by sufficient circumstantial evidence to permit the inference of negligence.


Question: If a person suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills, is the pharmacy liable under the theory of respondeat superior?

Answer: Yes. The pharmacy, as the pharmacist's employer, is also liable under the theory of respondeat superior if a person suffers kidney failure after receiving 70mg pills from a pharmacist even though the prescription clearly states 50mg pills.


Question: A plaintiff sues the federal government for killing his cows, and the trier of fact finds no evidence of negligence on the part of the federal government. Must the plaintiff's claim be dismissed?

Answer: Yes. If the plaintiff sues the federal government for killing his cows, and the trier of fact finds no evidence of negligence on the part of the federal government, the plaintiff's claim must be dismissed.


Question: Is a statute that makes the federal government liable only for negligence and no other torts constitutional?

Answer: Yes. If a statute makes the federal government liable only for negligence and no other torts, the statute is constitutional.


Question: Is a negligent tortfeasor generally liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties resulting from the tortfeasor's negligent conduct?

Answer: No. A negligent tortfeasor is not generally liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties resulting from the tortfeasor's negligent conduct, unless the third party tortious or criminal acts were foreseeable by the tortfeasor.


Question: When will a negligent tortfeasor be found liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties?

Answer: A negligent tortfeasor will be found liable for the tortious or criminal acts of third parties if the third party tortious or criminal acts were foreseeable by the tortfeasor.


Question: Does a medical professional's duty of care extend to non-patients?

Answer: No. Unless a patient poses a threat to others, a medical professional's duty of care extends only to the patient, and non-patients will have no cause of action against the medical professional for the acts of the patient.


Question: Is a person negligent if he has an unforeseen medical emergency while driving his car and he crashes into another vehicle?

Answer: No. A person is not negligent if he has an unforeseen medical emergency (such as a heart attack) while driving his car and he crashes into another vehicle.


Question: What duty does a defendant have to not act in a negligent or reckless manner?

Answer: A defendant has a duty to not act in a negligent or reckless manner and is liable in tort if he fails to take reasonable steps to anticipate and prevent a plaintiff's injury.


Question: If it is normal practice to consult with an expert, will a defendant be found negligent for breaching a duty of care by failing to consult with an expert?

Answer: No. A defendant will not be found negligent for breaching a duty of care by failing to consult with an expert, unless it can be shown that the outcome would have been different if the expert was consulted.


Question: If a person who suffers a heart attack while driving hits a child, will the driver be found negligent?

Answer: No. A person who suffers a heart attack while driving and hits a child will not be found negligent if the driver took reasonable care while driving and the heart attack was unforeseeable.


Question: Is there a legal duty for a doctor to provide aid to an injured party if the doctor is not responsible for the injured party's condition?

Answer: No. There is no legal duty for a doctor to provide aid to an injured party if the doctor is not responsible for the injured party's condition.


Question: When might an individual have a legal duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm?

Answer: An individual may have a legal duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm due to the individual's non-negligent conduct. This duty is greater than a duty to aid another person who is in immediate danger of serious harm due to a stranger's wrongful conduct.


Question: What does it mean when a defendant 'takes his plaintiff as he finds him'?

Answer: A defendant 'takes his plaintiff as he finds him' and is liable even if the extent of the injury was not a foreseeable consequence of the negligence.


Question: A municipality fails to replace a traffic control device at a busy intersection within four days. An injury occurs as a result. Is the municipality negligent?

Answer: Yes. The municipality is likely negligent because its failure to replace the traffic control device within a reasonable time frame, especially at a busy intersection, constitutes a breach of its duty to maintain safe road conditions. The standard of care for municipalities includes timely maintenance and repair of traffic control devices to prevent accidents and injuries.


Question: Can a person be liable in tort solely on the grounds that he failed to render assistance?

Answer: No. A person generally cannot be liable in tort solely on the grounds that he failed to render assistance.


Question: Is a person negligent if a specific danger is imminent and patently foreseeable and he exposes the plaintiff to it anyway, resulting in injury?

Answer: Yes. If a specific danger is imminent and patently foreseeable and a person exposes the plaintiff to it anyway, the person is negligent if an injury occurs.


Question: If a tortfeasor tries to warn the plaintiff but is unsuccessful and the plaintiff is injured by the tortfeasor's conduct, will the tortfeasor be found negligent?

Answer: Yes. If a tortfeasor tries to warn the plaintiff but is unsuccessful and the plaintiff is injured by the tortfeasor's conduct, the tortfeasor will be found negligent.


Question: Is there a duty to control the conduct of a third person?

Answer: No. There is no duty to control the conduct of a third person, except in special relationships (for example: common carrier/passengers; innkeeper/guests; employer/employee; school/student; jailor/prisoner; landlord/tenant; or hospitals and therapists who are in charge of dangerous mental patients).


Question: A car owner is still liable if he injures someone because the car wouldn't stop, even if it was due to his mechanic putting defective brakes on the car. Is the car owner still liable?

Answer: Yes. The car owner is still liable if he injures someone because the car wouldn't stop, even if it was due to his mechanic putting defective brakes on the car, because public policy makes certain duties nondelegable.


Question: Does public policy make certain duties nondelegable?

Answer: Yes. Public policy makes certain duties nondelegable.


Question: Is a defendant liable if the type of injury is foreseeable, even if the extent of the injury is unforeseeable?

Answer: Yes. If the type of injury is foreseeable, then the defendant is liable even if the extent of the injury is unforeseeable.


Question: Is the question of whether a defendant has breached a duty to the plaintiff a question of fact to be determined by the jury?

Answer: Yes. Whether a defendant has breached a duty to the plaintiff is a question of fact to be determined by the jury.


Question: A twelve-year-old boy is killed when his motorcycle collides with the defendant's car on the street. What standard of care will be applied to the boy's operation of the motorcycle?

Answer: The boy's operation of the motorcycle will be held to the adult standard of a reasonably prudent person because the boy was engaged in an adult activity that was inherently dangerous.


Question: Are minors engaging in adult activities held to the adult standard of care?

Answer: Yes. Children engaging in adult activities (for example: operating a motorcycle, car, or boat) are required to conform to an adult standard of care.


Question: How are minors generally judged in negligence actions?

Answer: In negligence actions, minors are generally judged by what would be expected of a child of similar age, experience, and intelligence (subjective test).


Question: A 12-year-old is driving a motor boat. What standard of care is the child held to?

Answer: A 12-year-old driving a motor boat will be held to the same standard of care as an adult.


Question: In negligence actions, are minors held to the standard of a reasonable child of similar age, intelligence, and experience?

Answer: Yes. In negligence actions, minors are held to the standard of a reasonable child (not that of an adult) of similar age, intelligence, and experience (capacity).


Question: What must a plaintiff establish to prove a prima facie case of professional negligence?

Answer: To prove a prima facie case of professional negligence, the plaintiff must establish the appropriate standard of care and show the defendant failed to adhere to that standard of care. The plaintiff must generally use expert testimony to establish what a reasonable professional would have done in the situation.


Question: Are parents liable for a child's torts/negligence merely on the basis of the parental relationship alone?

Answer: No. Parents are not liable for a child's torts/negligence merely on the basis of the parental relationship alone, although a parent can be guilty of negligent supervision, failure to warn, or failure to exercise reasonable care to protect against the child's dangerous propensities.


Question: Does a parent's duty to an invitee extend to warning of hazards the invitee may face on the property or upon leaving the property?

Answer: Yes. A parent's duty to an invitee extends to warning of hazards the invitee may face on the property or upon leaving the property.


Question: Will a negligence claim based on the parent's failure to warn hold up if the injured party was aware of the hazard through general knowledge, observation, or common sense?

Answer: No. A negligence claim based on the parent's failure to warn will not hold up if the injured party was aware of the hazard through general knowledge, observation, or common sense, because the failure to warn cannot be the proximate cause of the invitee's injury.


Question: Is the evidence of industry custom conclusive on the issue of a plaintiff's negligence?

Answer: No. Evidence of industry custom is relevant and admissible, but not conclusive, on the issue of the plaintiff's negligence to the same extent it would be in a suit by the defendant against the plaintiff for damage to the defendant's truck.


Question: Is the existence of an ordinary custom in an industry relevant and admissible in evidence on the issue of negligence?

Answer: Yes. The existence of an ordinary custom in an industry is relevant and admissible in evidence on the issue of negligence, but it is not conclusive because the negligence standard of an ordinarily prudent person may be a higher standard than the standard of care followed by a particular community or industry.


Question: A 13-year-old boy with an IQ of 60 drives a car without parental supervision and accidentally hits a pedestrian. Will he be liable in negligence?

Answer: Yes. He will be liable in negligence because he was engaging in an adult activity, and a minor who engages in a dangerous activity is held to the adult standard of care without considering the minor's mental disability or lack of experience.


Question: How is a child held in terms of the standard of care?

Answer: A child is held to the level of conduct of a reasonable person of that age and experience, not that of an adult.


Question: What is the standard of conduct for a child?

Answer: A child is held to the level of conduct of a reasonable person of that age and experience. However, where a child engages in a potentially dangerous activity normally pursued only by adults, the child will be held to the standard of care that a reasonable adult doing that activity would exercise. For example, a 13-year-old boy with an IQ of 60 drives a car without parental supervision and accidentally hits a pedestrian. Will he be liable in negligence? Yes. He will be liable in negligence because he was engaging in an adult activity, and a minor who engages in a dangerous activity is held to the adult standard of care without considering the minor's mental disability or lack of experience.


Question: A mother gives birth to a blind baby after a doctor negligently fails to diagnose a common genetic defect responsible for the blindness. What is the best action against the doctor?

Answer: The best action against the doctor is a wrongful birth action by the mother for expenses she has incurred due to the baby's blindness. The mother can argue that but for the doctor's negligence, she would not have proceeded with the pregnancy.


Question: What is a wrongful birth action?

Answer: A wrongful birth action is a claim by parents of a deformed or defective child who allege that negligent advice as to the risk of genetic or birth defects, or negligent treatment, or failure to abort a fetus, by the defendant deprived them of the choice of avoiding the child's conception or of terminating the pregnancy. The parents are entitled to compensation for the financial loss they will suffer for raising a physically or mentally challenged child. For example, a mother gives birth to a blind baby after a doctor negligently fails to diagnose a common genetic defect responsible for the blindness. What is the best action against the doctor? The best action against the doctor is a wrongful birth action by the mother for expenses she has incurred due to the baby's blindness. The mother can argue that but for the doctor's negligence, she would not have proceeded with the pregnancy.


Question: Can a criminal statute be used to set the standard of care in a negligence action?

Answer: Yes. A criminal statute can be used to set the standard of care in a negligence action if: (1) the statute in question was designed to protect the class of persons that includes the plaintiff; and (2) the statute was designed to protect against the kind of harm the plaintiff actually suffered. For example, a criminal statute requires fire sprinklers in warehouses. The plaintiff is injured due to a fire in the defendant's unsprinklered warehouse. Can the plaintiff recover from the defendant? Yes. The plaintiff can recover from the defendant because the plaintiff was harmed by the defendant's violation of a statute enacted to protect against this type of harm.


Question: A man sues a car rental agency for his injuries caused by an exploding bomb hidden in his rented car. Is the rental agency liable?

Answer: No. The rental agency is not liable since the danger is not reasonably foreseeable due to the extreme rarity of such an event. The rental company had no specific reasons to suspect such a danger.


Question: What is the standard of conduct to avoid being negligent?

Answer: The standard of conduct to which one must conform to avoid being negligent is that of a reasonable person under like circumstances.


Question: A hiker enters the owner's land without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured by a falling tree limb infested by termites. Is the owner liable for the hiker's injury?

Answer: No. The owner is not liable for the hiker's injury.


Question: A person is hiking on private property without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured. Is the owner liable?

Answer: No. If a person is hiking on private property without the owner's knowledge or permission and is injured, the owner is generally not liable. A possessor of land is not required to exercise reasonable care to make his land safe for trespassers except for artificial conditions highly dangerous to trespassers and only when he knows about the trespasser or has some reason to anticipate the trespasser's presence.


Question: Can a police officer injured in a non-emergency situation sue the tortfeasor for negligence?

Answer: Yes. A police officer injured in a non-emergency situation can sue the tortfeasor for negligence if the injury was not based on the risks inherent with dangerous police work.


Question: A bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger. Will a claim of negligence succeed in a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction?

Answer: No. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger, a claim of negligence will fail.


Question: In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, will a claim of negligence by a bright nine-year-old fail if the child fails to appreciate an obvious risk?

Answer: Yes. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a bright nine-year-old fails to appreciate an obvious risk where a sign also warns of the danger, a claim of negligence will fail. A danger encountered by a child trespasser is not an attractive nuisance unless there is evidence that the possessor has reason to know that children are likely to trespass and evidence that the plaintiff did not appreciate the risk involved.


Question: In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, is a day care center negligent if a child escapes and is injured despite the center exercising reasonable care?

Answer: No. In a pure comparative negligence jurisdiction, if a child in a day care center somehow escapes and is injured, the day care center will not be held negligent if the center exercised reasonable care to ensure that the children in their charge did not leave the premises.


Question: A defendant is sued for negligence based on a violation of a statute. When should the action be dismissed?

Answer: The action should be dismissed if it can be shown that the statute was not intended to protect the plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred.


Question: When should an action for negligence be dismissed if it is based on a violation of a statute?

Answer: An action for negligence should be dismissed if the only evidence supporting the claim is that the defendant violated a statute and it can be shown that the statute was not intended to protect the plaintiff from the type of harm that occurred.


Question: Can the seller of a house be held liable for negligence if he was aware of a defective condition and a person is subsequently injured by it?

Answer: Yes. The seller of a house can be held liable for negligence if he was aware of a defective condition, sells the home, and a person is subsequently injured by the defective condition.


Question: Can a defendant be found negligent for failure to warn if a reasonably prudent person would warn of the danger?

Answer: Yes. A defendant can be found negligent for failure to warn if a reasonably prudent person would warn of the danger.


Question: Is a common carrier liable if conditions made it impossible to render assistance to an injured passenger?

Answer: No. Although a common carrier has a duty to aid an injured passenger, the carrier is not liable if conditions made it impossible for the carrier to render assistance.


Question: If an injured party violated a safety statute, but the injury was not the result of a risk the statute was designed to protect against, should the violation be considered by the jury?

Answer: No. If an injured party violated a safety statute, but the injury to the injured party was not the result of a risk the statute was designed to protect against, the violation of the statute should not be considered by the jury.


Question: Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, what duty does an owner owe to a trespassing child?

Answer: Under the Attractive Nuisance doctrine, an owner owes a duty of reasonable care to a trespassing child if: (1) the owner knows that the area is one where children are likely to trespass; (2) the owner has reason to know that the condition poses an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death to trespassing children; (3) the injured child either does not discover the condition or does not realize the danger, due to his youth; (4) the benefit to the owner of maintaining the condition in its dangerous form is slight weighed against the risk to the children; and (5) the owner fails to use reasonable care to eliminate the danger.