Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
From the 1920s to the 1960s, racially restrictive covenants became a common tool to prevent racial, ethnic and religious minorities from buying, leasing or occupying homes in certain areas. More ...
The covenant must 'touch and concern' the land – it must affect how the land is used or the value of the land The benefited land must be identifiable. At common law, the burden of a restrictive covenant does not run [ 15 ] except where strict privity of estate (a landlord/tenant relationship) exists.
At the time of purchase, they were unaware that a restrictive covenant had been in place on the property since 1911. The restrictive covenant prevented "people of the Negro or Mongolian Race" from occupying the property. Louis Kraemer, who lived ten blocks away, sued to prevent the Shelleys from gaining possession of the property.
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.
Rejecting that argument, the Illinois state court held that the covenant was enforceable. [1] Years later, a homeowner who had signed the restrictive covenant sold his home to Carl Augustus Hansberry, the father of Lorraine Hansberry. Anna M. Lee, a homeowner, sought to enforce the racially restrictive covenant and void the sale.
Corrigan v. Buckley, 271 U.S. 323 (1926), was a US Supreme Court case in 1926 that ruled that the racially-restrictive covenant of multiple residents on S Street NW, between 18th Street and New Hampshire Avenue, in Washington, DC, was a legally-binding document that made the selling of a house to a black family a void contract. [1]
Kraemer precluded judicial enforcement of racially restrictive housing covenants. [7] Prior to 1948, the California Real Estate Association routinely promoted and enforced racially restrictive housing covenants to prevent family homes from ending up in the hands of minorities, particularly Negroes. [8]
Noble and Wolf v Alley [1951] S.C.R. 64 is a famous Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court struck down a restrictive covenant that restricted ownership of a section of land to "persons of the white or Caucasian race".