Exam Pro: Property 13 results (showing 5 best matches)
Preface 12 results (showing 5 best matches)
- This book is the Property contribution to West Group’s new
- Each first-year Property course is taught differently at each law school, and each professor teaches selected topics in different sequences. This is becoming increasingly true as law schools cut the basic Property course from 6 credit hours, to 5, 4 or even 3 credit hours. And while law schools are looking to reduce the credit hours for the basic Property class, professors are looking for new topics to incorporate into the course. Writing a study aid under such conditions is a challenge. To facilitate your use of this book, and to maximize the benefit you can take from this book, following this PREFACE is an O section which is designed to assist you: (1) in understanding the organization of the subject matter coverage in this book, and (2) in locating particular property topics as they appear in the problems in the exams. No matter how many credit hours your Property course has, which textbook book you use, or who your professor is, the problems in this book will help you understand
- The book consists of eight examinations in property, containing a total of 200 OBJECTIVE QUESTIONS. Virtually all of these questions are
- Each exam consists of twenty-five objective problems, followed by four to five multiple-choice answers. In the back of this book are tear-out answer sheets to allow you to take each exam under simulated examination conditions. Each exam is intended to take approximately one hour. If your professor permits you to use other materials during your exam, then use these as well.
- The primary purpose of this book is to assist first-year property students in preparing for objective, multiple choice examination questions. The questions, however, can also be used to help students prepare for essay questions. Many of the problems are essay quality fact patterns. The answer key explanations are well written, exam quality answers. Students can take the questions as objective, multiple choice examinations, or students can write out essay answers for the questions and compare their essays to the answer key explanations.
- Open Chapter
Table of Problems 2 results
- The Exams are organized according to the material typically covered in a 3, 4, or 5-6 credit Property course. Exams I, II and III focus on the material typically covered in a 3 credit Property course (or the first semester of a two semester Property course.). Exam IV focuses on the added material typically covered in a 4 credit property course. Exams V and VI focus on the added material typically covered in a 5-6 credit course. Exam 7 contains additional questions from all of the above, plus challenging overlapping questions. Exam 8 focuses on those “fringe” Property topics which some professors cover, which are important, but typically are covered in greater detail in other law school courses.
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam II 65 results (showing 5 best matches)
- because it implicitly mischaracterizes the asset as A’s separate property asset without acknowledging that community property funds were used to purchase the asset. Although the time of inception approach would characterize the asset as A’s separate property, A would still not be entitled to all $1,000,000 since community funds were also used and need to be taken into consideration. approach, it miscalculates how to split the proceeds. Answer B simply splits the $1,000,000 in half as if it were all community property, and then makes B pay all of the $40,000 loan back The loan was not to B but to the community. The community should pay the loan back. The loan should be paid back first, then the remaining proceeds are split 50-50. because it implicitly characterizes the asset as community property and splits it half and half without taking into account that separate property funds were also used to purchase the asset. Answer (D) fails to take into account how the loan of separate
- There are several different approaches to how to characterize an asset when separate and community property funds are used to purchase the asset: (1) the time of inception approach; (2) the time of vesting approach; (3) the pro rata approach; and (4) the gift approach. The call of the question specifically asks for how the facts would come out under the time of vesting approach.
- Under the time of vesting approach, the asset is characterized according to the nature of the funds which were used to “vest” the property interest in the purchasers. The property interest typically vests upon the final payment. Hence the key question is whether separate property funds or community property funds were used to make the final payment. If separate property funds were used, the asset is characterized as separate property. If community property funds were used, the asset is characterized as community property. Here, the final payment was made with community property funds, so under the time of vesting approach, the asset is characterized as a community property asset.
- The second key variable in determining who has the best claim to the found item is whether the item was found on private or public property. If found on private property, the common law granted the item to the owner of the private property generally to deter trespass and to protect landowners’ expectations. Here, Ali found the ring on the boardwalk, presumably public property. Even if the boardwalk were actually private property designed to look like public property, private property which is open to the public generally is considered public property for purposes of the law of finders. The common law rule is that lost property found on public property belongs to the finder, who has superior rights over all but the true owner or one with a superior claim. Because the ring was found on the boardwalk, a public location, Ali prevails over Bob.
- Under the traditional common law rules regarding found tangible personal property, who has superior rights depends in large degree upon two key variables: (1) how the property is characterized (lost, mislaid, abandoned or treasure trove), and (2) where the object is found (private property vs. public property).
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam VII 76 results (showing 5 best matches)
- At common law, the law of finders turned on whether the property was lost or mislaid, and whether the property was found in a public or private location. Lost property found in a public area went to the finder - to reward the finder for coming forward with the find. Lost property found on private property went to the owner of the private property to deter trespass and to protect landowner’s expectations. Mislaid property went to the owner of the property where it was found, be it private or public, on the assumption that the owner of mislaid property was more likely to retrace his or her steps in searching for the property.
- Many have criticized the common law distinction between lost and mislaid property. The critics argue that owners of property are just as likely as the owners of property to retrace their steps in an effort to locate lost property. Moreover, if finders of property know the rule that property characterized as mislaid gives the finder no rights to the property, finders would be more reluctant to come forward with the found property, thereby destroying any chance of getting the property back to its true owner.
- because the adverse possessor’s possession need only be as open and notorious as other owners in the area use their property as long as it is sufficient to put the true owner on constructive notice that the land is being possessed. Here, since the property was heavily wooded, Alice’s camping and hiking on the property may be sufficient, especially since Alice left an improvement on the property, the hut. If Ollie had walked the property, he would have had sufficient opportunity to discover her. In addition, Alice gets credit for Bob’s actions, which also arguably constitute constructive notice. because the adverse possessor’s possession need only be as continuous as an ordinary owner holding similar property would use the land. There is no evidence that any of the surrounding owners used their property any more, or even as much as, Alice used the property in question. Her weekend and vacation use of the property should be adequate. ...property was not voluntary, and her...
- In addition, many have criticized the lost-mislaid distinction as arbitrary. Lost property is property which the true owner unintentionally relinquishes possession of - usually not realizing it. Mislaid property is property which the true owner intentionally relinquishes possession of, but with the intent to return and pick it up later. The distinction between lost and mislaid property then turns on the intent of the true owner. Yet, the problem is no one knows who the true owner is. How is one to determine the true owner’s intent at the time the true owner relinquished possession? The courts assume the true owner’s intent from the circumstances surrounding the property when it is found. That, however, assumes that the property has not been moved or changed in any way since it left the true owner’s possession.
- because it is an overstatement. Although the general rule is that the finder has superior title over all but the true owner, that is not always true. A prior finder will prevail over a subsequent finder, and if the property is found in on private property, usually the owner of the property where the item is found will prevail. The statement that a finder has superior title over all but the true owner does not help resolve who has a superior title under these facts. because it presumes that the money was mislaid. Arguments can be advanced on both sides factually, and legally the distinction between lost and mislaid property can be attacked. To the extent that the proper characterization is ambiguous, arguably doubts should be resolved in favor of the finder. because the expectations of the landowner are protected only if the property is found on private property. Here, it is unclear whether the ...privacy than to promote the private property rights of the Bank. In addition,...
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam V 87 results (showing 5 best matches)
- C, however, is charged with knowledge of A’s interest under inquiry notice. Prior to purchasing real property, a purchaser has a duty to physically inspect the property. During the inspection, if the purchaser discovers any facts suggesting any possible property interests, the purchaser has a duty to inquire as to the extent of the property interest. If a party other than the grantor is in possession of the property, the purchaser has a duty to inquire as to the extent of the possessor’s claimed property interest. Under the facts, A was in possession of the property. A’s possession put C on inquiry notice of A’s potential interest in the property.
- Since the holder of the mineral rights interest inherently needs access to the property to utilize the mineral rights, an easement by necessity will be implied. An easement by necessity arises when part of a parcel of real property is severed from the rest, and the act of severing the part results in part of the property being landlocked. When Owner sold half of the mineral rights, that half in essence was severed from the rest of the property and was landlocked in the sense that Miner, the holder of the property interest, had no way of reaching the property interest without committing trespass. An easement by necessity is implied across Greenacre to permit access to the one-half mineral rights property interest.
- because a quitclaim deed is effective to transfer a property interest, and a will devises only property which is still the testator’s property at the time of death. If the testator holds only a life estate interest in the property, the testator’s interest expires upon the testator’s death and there is no interest in the property for the will to transfer. because although plausible, the common law courts were very protective of the wills act formalities and generally held that anything which appeared to transfer a property interest at time of death had to comply with wills act formalities (which a typical deed did not satisfy). because the courts require strict compliance with the wills act formalities, and any transfer which appeared to transfer a property interest at time of death had to comply strictly with wills act formalities (which a typical deed did not satisfy).
- The memo describes the property with reasonable certainty. The legal description is not necessary. Any reference to or description of the property which permits its identification upon reasonable inquiry suffices. Here, assuming that Olivia owns only one house on Elm Street (the more reasonable assumption in the absence of additional facts), there should be no problem identifying the property being conveyed.
- property implicitly expresses the intent to sell the property (or at least Paul’s intent to convey consideration in exchange for the property).
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam V 24 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Every conveyance of real property or an estate for years therein, other than a lease for a term not exceeding one year, is void against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee of the same property, or any part thereof, in good faith and for valuable consideration, whose conveyance is first duly recorded, and as against any judgment affecting the title, unless the conveyance shall have been duly recorded prior to the record of notice of action.
- Nelson’s wife died in 1990. In 1995, Nelson executed his will, devising all his property to his four daughters. In 2000, Nelson properly executed and delivered a quitclaim deed which purported to convey Nelson’s residence to Jonathan as a gift, reserving a “Life Estate in and to said property, with power to revoke, sell, rent, lease, mortgage or otherwise dispose of said property during Nelson’s natural lifetime.” Nelson continued to live in the residence until his death in 2005 and used none of his reserved powers.
- Othello, who owns Veniceacre, decides to give it to Duke as a gift. Othello properly executes a deed and gives it to Duke for Duke’s attorney to review. While Duke’s attorney is reviewing the instrument, Othello dies suddenly and unexpectedly. His Last Will and Testament gives all of his real property to Rod and all of his personal property to Iago.
- Purchaser executes a standard contract to purchase Greenacre, a lush farm. Purchaser plans to build a huge shopping mall. When local residents hear of Purchaser’s plans, prior to closing they persuade the city to rezone the property from commercial to residential, an unexpected change which greatly reduces the value of the land to Purchaser. Purchaser repudiates the contract to purchase.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam VIII 26 results (showing 5 best matches)
- (E) Since there is not enough money to pay off all the creditors, the creditors will share pro rata in the foreclosure sale proceeds.
- (D) The purchaser takes subject to the remaining pro rata balances on the mortgages held by 1
- 22. An otherwise properly drafted and executed deed, which describes the property to be conveyed as “all the grantor’s property in a certain county (or similar designated area)” is:
- H and W marry and live in California, a community property state. From W’s earnings during marriage, W accumulates $600,000, all of which W holds in her name alone. In 2000, H and W move to Missouri, a non-community property state, where W accumulates an additional $300,000 from W’s earnings in Missouri which she again holds in her name alone. On December 1, 2007, W dies and leaves a will which devises all of her property to UCLA. Assume Missouri law provides that upon W’s death, H is entitled to an elective share of ONE-THIRD (1/3) of W’s probate estate.
- encroach onto Jessie’s property. Instead the path runs along the border of Jessie’s property, butting up to it but at no point crossing it. Although the foot traffic along the pathway is sparse and sporadic, it intermittently blocks the view from Jessie’s patio and infringes on its sense of privacy. As a result of the foot traffic by the patio, customers are no longer drawn to the patio and Jessie’s profits have fallen by 1/3.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam III 13 results (showing 5 best matches)
- (C) Gerri is entitled to a pro rata reduction in rent.
- (C) Gerri is entitled to a pro rata reduction in rent.
- (B) Betsy is liable, pro rata, for the three extra days she stayed over, but that is all.
- H and W are married. They have one child, C, who lives out of town. H and W bought 2 parcels of property during their marriage, each with a house on it. The deeds to each conveyed the property “to H and W jointly.” The parcels were known as the “big house” and “the little house.” H and W lived in the big house and used the little house as a vacation home. H died without a will in 1995.
- After H’s death, W continued to live in the big house and rented out the little house. W paid all the taxes on the property and made improvements to the house. Neither W nor C ever discussed the situation until 2007, when W had a falling out with C over her new husband. Shortly thereafter, C learned that under the state’s intestate distribution statute, when one spouse dies survived by spouse and children, the surviving spouse receives 2/3rds of the deceased spouse’s property, and the children split the other 1/3. Upon learning of her rights, C sued W asserting C’s rights to the property. W countered by claiming she owned each parcel outright under the deeds, and if not, under adverse possession. The statute of limitation for adverse possession in the jurisdiction is 10 years.
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam VIII 94 results (showing 5 best matches)
- because a junior lien holder’s foreclosure does not affect a properly recorded senior lien holder’s interest. The property is sold at foreclosure subject to the existing senior liens. Since National Trust & Loan is the foreclosing mortgagee, the foreclosure does not affect 1 State Bank’s interest in the property. The foreclosure is subject to 1 State Bank’s mortgage, which continues to run against the property. Since 1 because it fails to recognize that more than one creditor may have an interest in an asset. Jake executed mortgages on the property to several lenders. Each lender stands in line in order of first in time, first in right (assuming each lender’s interest is properly recorded), with the borrower standing in line last. When a middle of the line lender forecloses on the property, since the effect of the foreclosure is to wipe out the junior lien holders, each junior lien holder stands in line after the foreclosing lien holder but before the borrower. As a junior lien...
- Immediately prior to death, W owns $300,000 in separate property, and H and W own $600,000 as community property. Upon the death of a spouse, any and all community property is split 50-50. Both community property and separate property are probate property. Thus, when W dies, her half of the community property and all of her separate property will pass into her probate estate. W’s probate estate consists of her half of the community property ($600,000 divided by 2 = $300,000) plus her $300,000 in separate property. There is $600,000 in her probate estate. H holds the other half of the community property, $300,000, as his property.
- When a mortgagee forecloses, the foreclosure wipes out all junior property interests. A junior property interest is any property interest which is created after the time the mortgage was created (unless the later in time property interest qualifies for protection under the jurisdiction’s recording act, in which case it is treated as if it were a senior property interest). Senior property interests are those which were created before the mortgage was created. Senior property interests, if properly recorded, are not affected by foreclosure and the purchasing party takes subject to the senior property interests.
- Thereafter the couple moves to Missouri, a separate property jurisdiction. Once property has been legally characterized, the characterization of the property does not change just because the couple moves to another jurisdiction. The $600,000 W acquired in California, a community property state, remains community property even though the couple has moved to Missouri, a separate property jurisdiction. After moving to Missouri, W acquires another $300,000 in earnings. Since Missouri is a separate property jurisdiction, these earnings are W’s separate property. W owns all of the $300,000 as her separate property.
- (If the later in time property interest qualifies for protection under the recording act, it is treated as if it were a senior property interest. Senior property interests are those which were created before the mortgage or lien was created. Senior property interests, if properly recorded, are not affected by foreclosure and the purchasing party takes subject to the senior property interests.)
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam III 47 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The issue is whether the parties can contract out of the implied duties under the implied warranty of habitability. Although the modern trend approach generally takes more of a contractual view of the landlord-tenant relationship, as opposed to the traditional common law property approach, the modern trend also takes a more pro-tenant status approach. At least in the residential context, the assumption is that the parties lack equal bargaining power - that the typical residential tenant has no real power to negotiate terms and conditions in a lease. Because
- (In addition, the second key variable analyzed to determine who should get found property is whether the item was found on private or public property. If found on private property, the common law granted the item to the owner of the private property generally to deter trespass and to protect the property owner’s expectations. Here, Juan found the money in the boat, presumably private property. Inasmuch as Pete has defaulted on the payments to the Bank, the Bank took possession of the boat and steps into the shoes of the true owner. The Bank can assert the public policy arguments of deterring trespass and protecting the expectations of property owners. Even if the court were to construe the money as lost, a strong argument can be made that the Bank would still get the money as the owner of the private property where the money was found.)
- At common law, the law of waste provided that a tenant had the duty to return the property to the landlord in basically the same condition as the property was in when the tenant received it (except for reasonable wear and tear). Under affirmative waste, the tenant could not make substantial changes to the property, even if the changes arguably were improvements which increased the value of the property. Under permissive waste, the tenant could not stand by and let the property deteriorate even if the deterioration was due to natural causes. The effect of the doctrine of waste was to place the burden of repair on the tenant.
- Property rights are relative. Although one who steals or converts property to his own use does not thereby acquire title to it but rather holds the property subject to the rights of the true owner, one who wrongfully holds possession will prevail against all but those with a superior claim.
- Under the traditional common law of finders, who has superior rights depends in large degree upon two key variables: (1) how the property is characterized (lost, mislaid, abandoned or treasure trove), and (2) where the object is found (private property vs. public property).
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam VI 79 results (showing 5 best matches)
- A’s mortgage interest in Blackacre constitutes a property interest as real as if it were an easement. Inasmuch as A received the mortgage from O, the true owner of the property, there is no problem with the creation of the property interest. A will claim the mortgage interest in Blackacre based on first in time, first in right.
- The jurisdiction applies the notice recording act. To qualify for protection under a notice recording act, the party claiming protection from a prior in time property interest must be a subsequent bona fide purchaser without notice of the competing property claim. Inasmuch as O sold Blackacre to B, B qualifies as a subsequent purchaser (subsequent to A’s competing property claim). The question is whether B had notice of the competing property claim.
- Under the Statute of Frauds, to transfer an interest in real property, there must be a writing signed by the party to be charged which contains the necessary material provisions. There is a deed which is properly executed by O, the party to be charged. The question is whether it contains the necessary material provisions. The deed must describe the parties with reasonable certainty, the property with reasonable certainty, and express the intent to convey the property interest in question. Assuming O has only one niece named Carolyn, the court will admit extrinsic evidence to ascertain who O’s favorite niece is. Since O signed the deed, the parties can be identified with reasonable certainty. Although there is no detailed description of the property being transferred, a Mother Hubbard clause permits a grantor to convey all the property he or she owns within a specified jurisdiction, without an exact description of the property interests, as long as the grantor expresses the intent to...
- Under estoppel by deed, if a party purports to transfer a property interest which the party does not own, and then subsequently the party comes into ownership of that property interest, the party is estopped from denying the prior conveyance. By operation of law, the grantee of the prior conveyance holds title to the property interest.
- Under estoppel by deed, if a party purports to transfer a property interest which he or she does not own, and then subsequently the party acquires ownership of the property, the party is estopped from denying the prior conveyance. By operation of law the grantee of the prior conveyance holds title to the property interest.
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam IV 95 results (showing 5 best matches)
- is a more substantive interest. The key characteristic of an easement is that it is irrevocable. Inasmuch as an easement is a more substantial interest in real property, it should be created expressly in a written instrument which complies with the Statute of Frauds. A license does not need to be created in writing (though it may be). Lastly, the distinguishing characteristic of a is that it not only permits the grantee to enter the real property of another, it permits the grantee to remove property from the real property (typically property which is attached to the real property, though it need not be attached). Like easements, profits create a property interest and should be created in writing. Many commentators and treatises treat profits as simply a subset of easements.
- The issue of whether Carrie can assign her easement to Dottie turns in part on whether the easement is an easement appurtenant or an easement in gross. An easement appurtenant is where the benefit of the easement is conveyed to the owner of a parcel of real property. The benefit attaches to the real property, not to the individual who happens to own the parcel currently. If the property is sold, the benefit stays with the real property and is transferred to the new owner. An easement appurtenant cannot be transferred to someone who does not hold an interest in the real property to which the benefit is appurtenant. In contrast, if the easement is an easement in gross, the benefit of the easement is held by an individual. The benefit stays with the individual wherever the individual may reside. To the extent the conveyance is ambiguous, easements appurtenant are favored over easements in gross.
- , that the easement is an easement appurtenant, the easement is terminated under the merger doctrine. A positive easement gives a party the right to enter another’s real property and use it in a way which would otherwise constitute a trespass. The key is that it gives one party limited rights to use real property. Accordingly, one cannot have an easement in one’s own real property. The merger doctrine is based upon that logic. If one holds an easement and thereafter acquires title to the servient estate (the burdened estate), the easement mergers into the fee simple title to the servient estate and is extinguished. Initially, B held an easement in Blackacre, A’s property. When A sold Blackacre to C, C took the property subject to B’s easement. When B sold Whiteacre to C, if the easement is appurtenant, the easement is attached to Whiteacre and passes with the title to Whiteacre to C. C now holds both the easement and the servient estate. Since C does not need an easement in C’s own
- Under the facts given, horizontal privity is present. The deed which created the covenant also conveyed an easement from Owner to Student. Thus Owner and Student had a grantor-grantee relationship with respect to a property interest other than the covenant, i.e. the easement. There is successive horizontal privity. The easement also created mutual horizontal privity since it created a shared property interest in the servient estate. Owner held a fee simple absolute in the property, and Student held an easement in the real property. Horizontal privity existed between Owner and Student.
- is a more substantive interest. The key characteristic of an easement is that it is irrevocable. Inasmuch as an easement is a more substantial incorporeal interest in real property, it should be created expressly in a written instrument which complies with the Statute of Frauds. A license creates no such interest and thus does not need to be created in writing (though it may be). Lastly, the distinguishing characteristic of a is that it not only permits the grantee to enter the real property of another, it permits the grantee to remove property (crops, minerals, trees, etc. - typically property which is attached to the real property) from the real property. Like easements, profits create a property interest and should be created in writing. Many commentators and treatises treat profits as simply a subset of easements.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam VI 20 results (showing 5 best matches)
- (C) O, if O can obtain title insurance on the property.
- 5. O sues to quiet title, claiming she never transferred the property to S. What is the best statement of the burden of proof and likely outcome under the modern trend?
- Assume that instead of O giving the properly executed deed to her son, she gave the deed to her attorney, with the instructions to give it to her son, S, one year from then, if she did not change her mind and ask for it back Six months later, the hospital seeks to attach the property to pay for her medical bills.
- Should the hospital be able to attach the property?
- Open Chapter
Property Answer Key And Explanations. Exam I 45 results (showing 5 best matches)
- because it is based upon a mistaken statement of the dower doctrine. Dower gives the surviving spouse only a life estate interest and only in 1/3 of the qualifying real property. Although Malibuacres is qualifying real property, W is not entitled to all of the property, only to a life estate interest in 1/3 of the property. because although it correctly limits W’s dower interest in duration to a life estate, it fails to limit the interest to 1/3, as opposed to all, of H’s qualifying real property. because although dower does not attach to property held in joint tenancy, the answer fails to take into account that a joint tenant may unilaterally sever a joint tenancy by transferring his or her interest. When B transferred his interest to W, the conveyance severed the 4 unities of title necessary for joint tenancy at common law, creating a tenancy in common between H and W. There is no right of survivorship in a tenancy in common. H’s interest in the tenancy in common property is...
- The doctrine of rationi soli provides that the owner of the real property has constructive possession of all wild animals on one’s property. B will claim the tiger based on rationi soli because the tiger was on B’s land when it was captured.
- At traditional common law, a surviving wife was entitled to claim her dower rights. Dower granted the surviving wife a life estate interest in 1/3 of the deceased husband’s qualifying real property. Qualifying real property was any interest in real property in which the husband was “seised” and the interest was inheritable. (One has “seisen” if he or she holds a freeholds estate: a fee simple, fee simple defeasible, or life estate interest in the land.)
- Even assuming that the condition arose as a result of a breach of a duty which the landlord owes the tenant, the tenant must also prove that the condition was severe enough to constructively evict the tenant. The condition constitutes constructive eviction if it seriously interferes with the beneficial enjoyment of the property or renders the property substantially unsuitable for the purposes for which they were leased.
- The law, however, goes to greater lengths to protect a property interest once it is acquired than it does the initial efforts to acquire the property interest. When the tiger escaped from the Zoo, the Zoo appeared to no longer have occupancy of the tiger because it appeared as if the tiger was no longer deprived of its natural liberty and was not under the Zoo’s certain control. Nevertheless, once a wild animal has been occupied, if the animal escapes, the party having occupancy of the animal does not lose his or her property claim to the animal until the animal returns to its natural habitat. Although the tiger appears to be a wild animal again, legally it is not because tigers are not native to Southern California. The Zoo has not lost its superior claim to the tiger. The Zoo’s property interest based on occupancy attached to the tiger before it ever went on B’s land. Under first in time, first in right, the Zoo’s claim based on occupancy trumps B’s rationi soli claim.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam VII 15 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Thereafter, Andy properly executes and delivers to Carl a special warranty deed which purports to transfer title to Greenacre from Andy to Carl. Carl knows about the prior deed from Andy to Barb. Carl paid Andy $40,000 for the property, but the deed recites that the consideration was $60,000. Carl records the deed which he received from Andy but does not take possession.
- No conveyance, transfer or mortgage of real property, or of any interest therein, nor any lease for a term of one year or
- Who has the superior claim to the property under the jurisdiction’s recording act?
- Who has the superior claim to the property under the jurisdiction’s recording act?
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam I 12 results (showing 5 best matches)
- O properly conveys Blackacre “to A and B and C and their heirs.” Thereafter, A properly executes a deed which purports to convey her interest to D and her heirs. Then B dies testate (with a will). B’s last will and testament devises all of her property to E and her heirs.
- Thereafter in 1990, AP enters adversely and possesses and improves the property in a manner necessary to satisfy the requirements of adverse possession. In 1998, however, A transfers her interest to X.
- H and W are husband and wife. H and his brother, B, hold Malibuacres in joint tenancy. Thereafter B conveys his interest in Malibuacres to W. Thereafter, H dies and devises all of his property to UCLA.
- (A) W has a dower interest in H’s property, which entitles her to all of H’s interest in Malibuacres.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam IV 21 results (showing 5 best matches)
- George and Jesse finally decide to retire from politics. George owns a nice little compound right on the coast. Jesse buys the lot right across the street. Although George and Jesse were rivals in politics, Jesse assumes that bygones are bygones and walks across the edge of George’s property every day to get to the beach. George is busy jumping out of airplanes and giving speeches, so he does not notice Jesse at first. Three years after Jesse started walking across George’s property, George finally notices him one day. George comes out on his porch, looks Jesse in the eyes, and yells “Read my lips! No more walking across my property.” Jesse thinks George is kidding (just like the other time) and continues walking across George’s property. Jesse keeps walking across George’s property every day for the next three years. The statute of limitations is 5 years.
- Alice and Betty live across the street from each other. Alice owns Malibuacres, beachfront property on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway. Betty owns Gullsway, a large estate on the mountainside of Pacific Coast Highway. They are good friends. Alice once told Betty that Betty could walk across Malibuacres anytime Betty wanted to get to the beach. Betty decides to sell Gullsway. Kristin, a co-worker, hears about Betty’s plans and inquires about buying Gullsway. When Kristin stops by Gullsway to check out the property, Betty takes her across the street to the beach to watch the sunset. Kristin falls in love with the property and purchases it. One day shortly after purchasing Gullsway, Kristin decides to walk over to the beach and catch the sunset. As she starts to cross Malibuacres, Alice comes running out of her house and yells at Kristin to get off Alice’s property.
- For valuable consideration, Owner, a Malibu resident, validly executes an instrument in favor of Student, a law student residing in the dormitories. The instrument provides that Owner conveys “to Student a right to drive across Owner’s property to get to the beach,” that the right is “to run with the land” and that “Owner, his heirs and assigns, promise to maintain the road.” Student records the instrument. Thereafter Owner conveys his property to Purchaser, and Student conveys his interest to Undergraduate. Purchaser blocks the road. Undergraduate sues.
- PETA now wishes to build a four building, twenty-six unit condominium complex on the northeast corner of the property, an area farthest from the land The Rifleman Hunting Club owns and close to several other residences. Each unit would have two bedrooms and a single car garage. An architect’s plans indicate that the area around the condominiums would contain a manicured lawn and a playground, along with walking paths and bridle paths in the undeveloped areas. Boat slips and a deck would be built on the shoreline. The condominium owners would be prohibited from hunting or fishing on the property.
- During hunting season in late fall and early winter, 19 club members still hunt deer, pheasant, ducks and geese on the Club’s property and PETA’s property. At trial, the hunting club president indicated on maps the areas where the club hunts. These areas included the area that PETA plans to develop. The hunting club president asserted that the increased human activity and reduced cover for animals would interfere with their hunting activities.
- Open Chapter
Property Multiple Choice Objective Questions. Exam II 9 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Oscar is the rightful owner of Malibuacres in fee simple absolute. In 1990, Oscar properly executes a deed conveying Malibuacres “to A and B and their heirs jointly.” A and B built a small restaurant on the property and began operating “Pete’s Diner” on the spot. In 1995, A dies with a properly executed will which gives all of A’s property to C.
- (D) the Trumpet Casino owners, since it was found on their property by Kristin in the course of her duties as their employee.
- (D) If the land is partitioned and sold, A is entitled to the value the improvement has added to the jointly held property before the proceeds from the partition sale are divided among the co-tenants.
- O conveys Malibuacres “to X in fee simple absolute.” Thereafter in 1990 X takes a job in Europe. Immediately after X leaves, X’s neighbor, Y builds a fence which encloses the back half of Malibuacres with Y’s property. In addition, Y gardens the back half of Malibacres for over 15 years before anyone notices. In 2005, when X finally hears what Y has done, X jumps on the first plane back, only to have the plane crash, killing all on board. X’s will, which was properly executed in 1999, leaves all of his property to Z, her 1 year old niece at the time (Z is 6 when X died).
- Open Chapter
- Publication Date: October 5th, 2007
- ISBN: 9780314180704
- Subject: Property
- Series: Exam Pro Series
- Type: Exam Prep
- Description: This study aid presents eight examinations pertaining to property rules and their application. The book contains 200 objective questions; all are actual final exam questions being released for the first time. Each exam consists of 25 objective problems and includes tear-out answer sheets to simulate exam conditions. The accompanying answers and detailed analysis foster a better understanding of each rule and how to apply it.