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

Case Citations [1] (April 2022 - August 2022)

handle is hein.ali/retprtys0263 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE PROPERTY 3D: SERVITUDES Introduction C.A.6, 2022. Intro. quot. in ftn. to conc. op. Taxpayer challenged a regulation providing that, in order to be deductible, a donation of a conservation easement to a charitable organization had to be granted in perpetuity or, upon extinguishment of the easement, the organization had to receive as proceeds a fair market value that was at least equal to the proportional value that the easement bore to the value of the entire property at the time of the gift. The Tax Court concluded that the regulation was valid, and this court affirmed. The concurring opinion cited Restatement Third of Property: Servitudes in noting that it was unclear why the organization would be entitled to a proportion of the value of any post-donation improvements by taxpayer under Restatement of Property § 508, which described the prevailing rules governing easements. Oakbrook Land Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 28 F.4th 700, 725. CHAPTER 1. DEFINITIONS § 1.2 Easement and Profit Defined C.A.10, 2021. Subsec. (1) quot. in cases quot. in sup. and in conc. op.; com. (c) quot. in sup. and in conc. op.; com. (d) cit. in sup. Owner of servient estate and lessee sued holder of an easement granted by the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875, alleging that a lease agreement entered into between the parties, under which plaintiffs could use a building that fell partly on the easement, should be rescinded because the easement was a nonpossessory interest. The district court granted in part plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. This court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded, holding, inter alia, that, although defendant had the right to exclude plaintiffs from the easement, this did not give it the power to lease the easement for non-railroad activities. The court noted that, under Restatement Third of Property: Servitudes § 1.2, an easement could exclude the owner of the servient estate while remaining nonpossessory in nature. The concurrence cited § 1.2 in observing that defendant's right to exclude plaintiffs from the easement was better interpreted as arising from the fact that plaintiffs' building was an unreasonable interference with defendant's use of the easement. LKL Associates, Inc. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, 17 F.4th 1287, 1295, 1297, 1307-1309. Or.App.2021. Com. (d) quot. in case quot. in diss. op. Owner of property on which half of a party wall was located sued neighbor that owned a building that used the wall as one of its four sides, alleging trespass, private nuisance, and unjust enrichment based on defendant's use of plaintiff's side of the wall for advertising purposes. The trial court granted summary judgment for defendant, finding that it had a prescriptive easement over the portion of the wall that it and its predecessors had used for COPYRIGHT C2022 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America 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