Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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.
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 ...
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.
Conservation easement boundary sign. In the United States, a conservation easement (also called conservation covenant, conservation restriction or conservation servitude) is a power invested in a qualified land conservation organization called a "land trust", or a governmental (municipal, county, state or federal) entity to constrain, as to a specified land area, the exercise of rights ...
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.
Zoning is a law that divides a jurisdiction's land into districts, or zones, and limits how land in each district can be used. [1] [2] In the United States, zoning includes various land use laws enforced through the police power rights of state governments and local governments to exercise authority over privately owned real property. [3]
An agreement for a first neighbour to refrain using his own land for the benefit of a second would be a restrictive covenant. Naturally people could contract to use land in any way conceivable. However the courts viewed it as a different matter whether a successor in title to the original contracting party was bound.
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.