Question

1. Bryer purchased a suburban home. At the time of the sale, the real estate salesperson pointed to a decorative stone fence as the boundary of the property. Because Bryer had several dogs he wanted to keep on his property, he erected a chain- link fence on what he believed to be the property line. His neighbor watched the work being done and did not object. Twenty years later, as a result of a new survey by the town, Bryer was surprised to learn that the fence was 18 inches inside the neighbor’s property. Can Bryer claim ownership of all the property on his side of the fence?
2. Rae owned a farm and each summer allowed a neighbor, Fuller, to set up a stand on Rae’s property to sell worms to people who drove by on their way to fish in the nearby lake. After 10 years of regularly using the small piece of property, Rae and Fuller had a dispute and Rae forbade Fuller from using his land again. Fuller claimed that he now had the right to continue using the small piece of property as he had in the past, insisting that an easement had been created. Did Fuller’s continued use of the property create an easement?
3. Harry and Marilyn Owen were divorced after a short marriage and entered into an agreement to divide assets. In addition to the division of personal property as agreed to and as recorded by the court, Marilyn claimed ownership of a Chevrolet automobile and one- half of a $ 24,000 certificate of deposit, insisting that they were both gifts from her former husband, Harry. Both the car, registered in Harry’s name, and the certificate were purchased by Harry before the marriage. He denied having given the car and a one- half interest in the certificate of deposit. Does it appear that the requirements of an inter vivos gift have been met, and will Marilyn be awarded the disputed property?
4. Paset, a renter of a safety deposit box at Old Orchard Bank and Trust Company, found $ 6,325 in currency on the seat of a chair in an examination booth in the safety deposit vault. The chair was partially under a table. Paset notified officers of the bank and turned the money over to them. She was told by bank officials that they would try to locate the owner and that she could have the money if the owner was not located within one year. The bank wrote to everyone who had been in the safety deposit vault area on the day of, or on the day preceding, the discovery, stating that property had been found. The money remained unclaimed, and after a year Paset claimed the money under the state statute governing the disposition of lost and found property. The bank refused, claiming that the money was mislaid, not lost, and was therefore property of the bank. Was the money lost or mislaid, and will the court award the money to Paset?



$1.99
Sales0
Views167
Comments0
  • CreatedOctober 01, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question
5000