Ad
related to: restrictive covenants in real estateuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
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 ...
In 1926, racially restrictive covenants were upheld by the Supreme Court case Corrigan v. Buckley. After this ruling, these covenants became popular across the country as a way to guarantee white, homogeneous neighborhoods. [7] In Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. in 1926, the Supreme Court also upheld exclusionary zoning.
Real covenants and easements or equitable servitudes are similar [9] and in 1986, a symposium discussed whether the law of easements, equitable servitudes, and real covenants should be unified. [4] As time passes and the original promisee of the covenant is no longer involved in the land, enforcement may become lax.
For decades, discriminatory practices like redlining and racially restrictive covenants have prevented Black people from owning homes or limited where they could buy. Such overt practices are, of ...
Largely dating back to the 1930s, ’40s and ’50s, the outdated covenants stretch from north to south, and many places in between. | A Matt Driscoll column There are 4,000 racist housing ...
In advocating support for a federal constitutional amendment guaranteeing the legal enforcement of racially restrictive covenants, the California Real Estate Association publication stated that "millions of home owners of the Caucasian race have constructed or acquired homes in areas restricted against occupancy by Negroes.
Real estate companies used deceitful tactics to make white homeowners think that their neighborhoods were being "invaded" by non-white residents, [6] which in turn would encourage them to quickly sell their houses at below-market prices. The companies then sold that property to blacks who were desperate to escape inner-city ghettos at higher ...
Ad
related to: restrictive covenants in real estateuslegalforms.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month