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. The strongest argument that the man can present is that the condition of Greenacres
The man brought an appropriate action against the woman to require her to abate what the man alleges to be a nuisance. In the lawsuit, the only issue is whether the condition of Greenacres constitutes a nuisance.
The man demanded that the woman keep the trees near Townacres trimmed. The woman refused.
A man owns Townacres in fee simple, and a woman owns the adjoining Greenacres in fee simple. The man has kept the lawns and trees on Townacres trimmed and neat. The woman «lets nature take its course» at Greenacres. The result on Greenacres is a tangle of underbrush, fallen trees, and standing trees that are in danger of losing limbs. Many of the trees on Greenacres are near Townacres. In the past, debris and large limbs have been blown from Greenacres onto Townacres. By local standards Greenacres is an eyesore that depresses market values of real property in the vicinity, but the condition of Greenacres violates no applicable laws or ordinances.
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
Adjoining landowners carry certain mutual rights, duties and liabilities. Landowners are expected to use their property reasonably without injuring the rights of adjoining landowners. The enjoyment should not unreasonably interfere or disturb the rights of adjoining landholders or create a private nuisance. Subject to this general requirement, a landowner can use her property according to her will upon the condition that such use will not injure any adjoining landowner.
Private nuisances are interferences with a plaintiff's use or enjoyment of his property. To make a claim for private nuisance, the plaintiff has the burden to show three elements: (i) the plaintiff has a possessory interest in the land; (ii) the defendant performed an act that interfered with the plaintiff's use and enjoyment of his property; and (iii) that the defendant's interference with the plaintiff's use or enjoyment of land was substantial and unreasonable. A substantial interference is one that would be offensive, inconvenient, or annoying to a reasonable person. Unreasonable interference is evaluated by balancing the social usefulness of the interference with the local conduct of the community.
B is correct. A property owner, whether an individual or a commercial entity, is entitled to make reasonable use of its property. Determining the parties' respective rights requires a balancing between the woman's right to use her property as she wishes on the one hand, and the man's right to quiet enjoyment of his property on the other. For the man to prevail, he must establish that the woman's use of her land constitutes an unreasonable interference with his use of his own land. This interference, however, must be based on more than mere aesthetics or market value considerations. The man must show that a more serious interference is occurring as a result of the woman's actions, such as a threat to the safety of those on his land. Therefore, this answer represents the man's strongest argument.
A is incorrect. It does not state a valid basis for a private nuisance claim, which would be an unreasonable interference with the man's use of his own land. As explained above, the impact on property values would not interfere with the man's right to use his own land.
C is incorrect. A violation of community aesthetic standards would not interfere with the man's right to use his land, so this would not be a valid basis for a claim against the woman. If there was a covenant or an equitable servitude that put in place community standards for the aesthetics of the property, the man could sue to enforce them, but there is no indication in the facts that a covenant or an equitable servitude exists.
D is incorrect. Although there are no covenants or equitable servitudes to enforce, the man can still sue the woman under the theory that her lack of upkeep is dangerous and poses a threat to others.