Property Law Keyed to Cribbetback
0 of 5 questions completed
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to pass the previous Module’s quiz in order to start this quiz:
you have successfully completed the quiz.
Debbie and Jose entered into a written contract whereby Debbie contracted to sell and Jose to purchase Packer Grounds at a price of $200,000. The closing date was set at August 8. Before the closing date, Jose received the title search report. The records on Packer Grounds in the County Recorder of Deeds office indicated that Arthur conveyed Packer Grounds to Caitlin by quitclaim deed in 1975 and that Antonio conveyed Packer Grounds to Debbie by warranty deed in 1987. Juan notified Debbie that the records did not indicate how Packer Grounds was conveyed to Antonio (Debbie’s immediate transferor), and that Juan was concerned about this. Debbie replied that she had no knowledge of the matter, but that she would look into it. At the date and time appointed for closing, Debbie informed Juan that she could not locate Antonio, or obtain any information as to the conveyance of Packer Grounds to him. Upon hearing this, Juan refused to tender the purchase money, and told Debbie that he was rescinding the contract. Debbie sued Juan for specific performance.
Which party is more likely to prevail?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Maria wanted her two daughters to have the family’s mountain property, Snowcap, to enjoy during their lives, but she knew if she left it one or the other, the daughter having no interest in the property would be hurt and never go there.
Maria also knew that her contentious daughters would not always have harmonious relations, and wanted to guard against hasty action by one if she left the property to both of them. Therefore, Maria executed a deed conveying Snowcap to her daughters, Cathy and Kristin, as tenants in common, but before she delivered it to them, she made them each promise the other that if one decided to sell her interest in Snowcap, she would offer it first to the other. The daughters agreed, and Maria delivered the deed to them.
Five years later, Maria died. Cathy became so incensed at the way Kristin acted at the funeral that she vowed never to have anything to do with her sister again. Without telling Kristin, Cathy sold her undivided half interest in Snowcap to Rick, who knew of the promise the sisters had made to each other. When Kristin learned of the sale to Rick, she immediately instituted an appropriate action to void Rick’s interest in Snowcap and to obtain specific performance of the oral agreement with Cathy, tendering into court the same amount of money paid by Rick for Cathy’s interest.
Will Kristin succeed in her action?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Vermland is located in the state of Vermtrillion, which has a statutory adverse possession period of 15 years. Apple purchased Vermland in 1965. It was a suburban property containing a single-family dwelling, which Apple made her home. Immediately adjoining Vermland was a five-foot-wide strip, which was a private right-of-way. When Apple took possession of Vermland in 1965, she was not sure where the exact boundaries of her property were located. Therefore, when she planted a garden and enclosed it with a wire fence two weeks after taking up occupancy, the five-foot right-of-way strip was included within the bounds of the fence.
Apple maintained the fence and garden until 1985, at which time she tired of gardening chores and took up golfing as a hobby instead.
When she gave up gardening, Apple also removed the fence and smoothed out the ground where the garden had been located. In 1990, Apple entered into a written contract to sell Vermland to Ben. The description in the contract included the five-foot strip. After research in the county recorder’s office, Ben discovered that the strip was a private right-of-way when Apple purchased Vermland. After properly notifying Apple of the problem prior to closing, Ben refused to tender the purchase money to Apple when the closing day arrived. Apple sued Ben for specific performance of the real estate sales contract.
Who will prevail?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Michael purchased ten acres of desert land from Property Dealers, Inc., dealing entirely by correspondence. Michael entered into possession of what he believed to be his ten acres of land, but he inadvertently misread the property description on the deed, and actually occupied a ten acre parcel one mile to the west of the parcel that had been conveyed to him. Because he had no neighbors at the time, nothing alerted Michael to his mistake. He built a large residence, paid all appropriate taxes and insurance, and otherwise conducted himself so to satisfy all requirements for obtaining title to the property by adverse possession. By this time, others had purchased parcels in the same area, and it came to Michael’s attention that he had located himself on the wrong land. In an appropriate action against Property Dealers, Michael obtained a judicial declaration that he was the owner and holder of legal title to the property he occupied.
Michael subsequently entered into a written contract to sell his property to Brian. After formation but prior to the date set for closing, Brian discovered that Michael had obtained title to his property via adverse possession, and that the concrete footings for Michael’s swimming pool extended onto the neighboring parcel along a 50 foot long strip, varying in width from several inches to one foot. No one had ever realized that Michael’s swimming pool encroached onto the neighboring property until Brian’s investigation revealed it.
Brian refused to tender the purchase price agreed upon in the contract. Michael brought an action for specific performance to compel Brian to complete the land sale transaction.
For whom should the court rule?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.
Juan and Jill entered into a written contract whereby Jill contracted to sell and Juan to purchase Shah Acre at a price of 1 million dollars. The closing date was set for August 8. Before the closing date, Juan received the title search report. The records on Shah Acre in the County Recorder of Deeds office indicated that Arthur conveyed ShahAcre to Caitlin by quitclaim deed in 1975 and that Antonio conveyed Shah Acre to Jill by warranty deed in 1987. Juan notified Jill that the records did not indicate how Shah Acre was conveyed to Antonio (Jill’s immediate transferor), and that Juan was concerned about this. Jill replied that she had no knowledge of the matter, but that she would look into it. At the date and time appointed for closing, Jill informed Juan that she could not locate Antonio, or obtain any information as to the conveyance of Shah Acre to him. Upon hearing this, Juan refused to tender the purchase money, and told Jill that he was rescinding the contract. Jill sued Juan for specific performance.
What are the rights of the parties?Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.Grading can be reviewed and adjusted.