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.
6. If the nephew prevails, it will be because
The nephew brought an appropriate action to enjoin the man from using Blackacre for filling station purposes.
The businessman then conveyed Blackacre to a man, who knew about the businessman's covenant prohibiting the filling station use but nonetheless completed the transaction when he noted that no such covenant was contained in the businessman's deed to him. The man began to construct a filling station on Blackacre.
The gas company owner constructed and operated a filling station on Whiteacre and then conveyed Whiteacre to his nephew, who continued the filling station use. The deed did not refer to the restrictive covenant and was promptly and properly recorded.
A businessman who owned Blackacre and Whiteacre, two adjoining parcels, conveyed Whiteacre to a gas company owner and covenanted in the deed to the gas company owner that when he, the businessman, sold Blackacre he would impose restrictive covenants to prohibit uses that would compete with the filling station that the gas company owner intended to construct and operate on Whiteacre. The deed was not recorded.
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
Because the facts indicate that the man had notice of the covenant to impose restrictions, the covenant will run with the land. Additionally, keep in mind the difference between an equitable servitude and a real covenant. If money damages are sought, you should consider it a possible real covenant. If an injunction is sought, consider whether you are dealing with an equitable servitude.
B is incorrect. The doctrine of negative reciprocal covenants only applies in cases where there is a common scheme, such as housing developments, where the developer accidentally left out an express covenant. The court then implies such a covenant for all the lots.
C is incorrect. This is an inaccurate statement of law.
D is incorrect. Constructive notice would not make a negative implied covenant legally enforceable.