Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In some cases property owners can petition a court to remove or modify the covenants, and homeowner associations may include procedures for removing the covenants. The covenant may be negative or affirmative. A negative covenant is one in which property owners are unable to perform a specific activity, such as block a scenic view.
In real estate, a restrictive covenant is a rule or condition placed on a property that outlines what homeowners can and cannot do with their land. These covenants are legally binding and often ...
Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case that held that racially restrictive housing covenants cannot legally be enforced.. The case arose after an African-American family purchased a house in St. Louis that was subject to a restrictive covenant preventing "people of the Negro or Mongolian Race" from occupying the property.
“While only a few cases exist,” Atkins said, “the general theme is that the intent of the Marketable Title Act should be broadly construed, while the application of restrictive covenants is ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Restrictive covenants were legal until a 1948 Supreme Court decision in Shelley v. Kraemer made them unenforceable, though they continued to be included on deeds until the 1968 Fair Housing Act deemed that illegal as well. [6] [17]
Tulk v Moxhay is a landmark English land law case which decided that in certain cases a restrictive covenant can "run with the land" (i.e. a future owner will be subject to the restriction) in equity. It is the reason that Leicester Square exists today.
This builds on earlier legislation that allowed homeowners to request the removal of such language. [57] Washington: The state passed a law in 2021 that requires all real estate documents to be free from racially restrictive covenants and provides a process for property owners to have them removed. [58]