About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citatiosn [1] (April 2017 through August 2017)

handle is hein.ali/relwprpty0253 and id is 1 raw text is: PROPERTY DIVISION 2. FREEHOLD ESTATES CHAPTER 6. ESTATES FOR LIFE TOPIC 2. CHARACTERISTICS § 139. Duty Not to Permit Deterioration of Land or Structures Vt.2016. Com. (c) quot. in sup. Lessor under a multi-year ground lease of property next to a lake sued lessee, seeking to void the lease and reenter the premises on the ground that lessee had violated its lease obligations by failing to maintain the embankments abutting the lake to protect them from erosion. After a bench trial, the trial court found in favor of lessor, but declined to terminate the lease. Reversing in part, this court held that lessor was entitled to terminate the lease as a matter of law in light of, among other things, the trial court's findings that the erosion of the embankments went beyond ordinary wear and tear and constituted waste. The court cited Restatement of Property § 139 in noting that ordinary wear and tear was defined with reference to reasonable conduct by the lessee, that a lessee could be obligated to take affirmative steps to protect the leased property from damage inflicted by the elements or unrelated third parties, and that, if the leased property could not be restored to its former condition, the landlord could elect to terminate the lease. Mongeon Bay Properties, LLC v. Mallets Bay Homeowner's Ass'n, 149 A.3d 940, 950. DIVISION 4. SOCIAL RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED UPON THE CREATION OF PROPERTY INTERESTS PART 2. RESTRAINTS ON ALIENATION CHAPTER 29. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS § 404. Definitions Ark.2017. Cit. in sup. Owners of property in a development filed a class action against golf course located in the development, seeking to invalidate provisions in supplemental declarations that their properties were subject to that required owners to, among other things, become full golf members, pay monthly dues, and, anytime the properties were sold, pay a transfer fee. The trial court entered judgment for defendant. Affirming, this court held that the trial court's finding that the provisions were enforceable was not clearly erroneous. The court looked to Restatement of Property § 404 and Restatement Third of Property: Servitudes §§ 3.4 and 3.5 in defining restraint on alienation, and determined that, here, the transfer fees were not unreasonable, because the transfer-fee requirement did not directly prohibit the transfer of property, since it only affected the amount received by an owner at sale and there was a rational basis to support the provision. Dye v. Diamante, 510 S.W.3d 759, 764. A L Im For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most