Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
16. In such action, the brother will
A year after the agreement was recorded, the brother temporarily reconciled his differences with his sister and resumed joint possession of Greenacre. Thereafter, the brother repudiated the boundary line agreement and brought an appropriate action against the neighbor and the sister to quiet title along the original true boundary.
The neighbor surveyed his land and found that the fence erected a year earlier by the brother did not follow the true boundary. Part of the fence was within Greenacre. Part of the fence encroached on the neighbor's land. The neighbor and the sister executed an agreement fixing the boundary line in accordance with the fence constructed by the brother. The agreement, which met all the formalities required in the jurisdiction, was promptly and properly recorded.
A brother and sister were jointly in possession of Greenacre in fee simple as tenants in common. They joined in a mortgage of Greenacre to a local bank. The brother erected a fence along what he considered to be the true boundary between Greenacre and the adjoining property, owned by the neighbor. Shortly thereafter, the brother had an argument with his sister and gave up his possession of Greenacre. The debt secured by the mortgage has not been paid.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Tenants in common can receive their interests at different times and from different conveyances. Tenants in common can also hold unequal shares of the land, even if both tenants will have full use of all of the premises.
When a tenant in common wants to create an easement or resolve a boundary dispute, that action will not affect the legal rights of any other tenants in common who do not sign the grant or agreement. Even when one tenant in common has sole occupancy of the premises, only agreements that all the tenants in common sign will apply to all of them.
B is correct. This question highlights the need to carefully identify which facts relate to the principle of law being tested and which are superfluous. The brother and sister's legal rights as tenants in common are unaffected by the degree to which they each physically possess the land. Although any one co-tenant has the right to possess the entire property, that possession in no way alters their ownership rights or those of the other co-tenants. The sister's possession of Greenacre in no way serves to give her the right to enter into agreements individually that would affect the rights of her co-tenant.
A is incorrect. This answer presents the correct conclusion with the wrong reasoning. The brother will win because the sister's possession does not entitle her to enter into individual agreements that would affect the rights of other joint tenants.
C is incorrect. Even if the agreement was mutually beneficial, it still does not mean the sister has the right to make individual agreements regarding property that is jointly owned. Only agreements or settlements to which the sister is a party and has signed will affect her legal rights to the property.
D is incorrect. A cursory analysis of the question may lead some students to incorrectly choose this answer because the facts state that the brother gave up possession, and this choice suggests that the sister wins because she was in sole possession. It is, however, ownership, not possession, that is relevant to answering the question presented.