Property Ownership Dispute

Summary

In Maryland, selling a joint tenancy interest severs the joint tenancy, creating a tenancy in common. Hals sale to Xin severed the joint tenancy, making Xin, Yap, and Zoe tenants in common with shares of ½, ¼, and ¼. In zoning disputes, public safety concerns, like those caused by Herbs neon sign, can lead to the city prevailing if the sign is deemed a nuisance. For nonconforming use cases, like Garys, prolonged inactivity can be seen as abandonment, leading to loss of rights to continue the use.

Full Conversation

*. Hal, Sam, and Ted own Greenacre as joint tenants. Hal sells his interest to Xin without notifying either Sam or Ted. One day later, Sam dies intestate as a result of a tragic chain saw mishap, leaving Yap as his only heir. The next day, Ted dies. Ted’s will leaves Ted’s entire estate to Zoe. Who has what interest in Greenacre? o Hal, Yap, and Zoe own Greenacre as tenants in common, in equal shares. o Xin, Yap, and Zoe own Greenacre as tenants in common, in fractional shares of ½, ¼, and ¼. o Xin and Zoe own as tenants in common, with shares of */* and */* respectively. o Yap and Zoe own Greenacre as tenants in common, in equal shares.
In Maryland, when a joint tenant sells their interest, it severs the joint tenancy and creates a tenancy in common regarding the sold interest.
- Hal's sale to Xin severs the joint tenancy between Hal and the others.
- After Sam's death, his interest passes to Yap.
- After Ted's death, his interest passes to Zoe.
Therefore, the correct answer is:
- Xin, Yap, and Zoe own Greenacre as tenants in common, in fractional shares of ½, ¼, and ¼.
*. Pam is running for a seat in the state legislature. Herb, a resident of City who is an avid supporter of Pam’s candidacy, erects a neon sign on the lawn in front of his house which reads: “Elect Pam!” Because the sign is quite large (* feet high and * feet wide) and the neon letters blink on and off, it sometimes distracts motorists who are driving down the street. During the five days the sign has been in place, the sign has caused three minor traffic accidents, one of which almost crushed a small child. The City now adopts a zoning ordinance which prohibits any neon sign in a residential zone which is larger than * square feet. Herb sues City. Who will win the lawsuit? o Herb, unless his house is already burdened by valid CC&Rs that restrict political signs. o Herb, because the sign is a prior nonconforming use. o City, because the sign is a nuisance. o City, unless Herb can prove unnecessary hardship.
In this case, given the fact that the neon sign has caused traffic accidents and poses a safety risk, the court is likely to prioritize public safety over individual property rights. Therefore, the most likely outcome is:
- City, because the sign is a nuisance.
The city's zoning ordinance is aimed at addressing safety concerns, which is a valid exercise of the city's police power.
*. Gary operates a successful corner grocery store in a residential area in City. City rezones the entire area, including Gary’s property, into the R-* zone; the only permitted use in this zone is single-family residences. Two weeks later, Gary’s store is badly damaged in an earthquake; it will require extensive structural work to make the store usable and will cost almost as much as building an entirely new store. However, this work will extend the useful life of the building by 80 years. Gary cleans up the debris, and then spends over a year deciding whether he should rebuild or retire. He decides to rebuild, only to discover that City refuses to issue a building permit. Gary sues City to obtain the permit. Who will win the lawsuit? o Gary, because his store was a prior nonconforming use. o Gary, because his store is not a nuisance. o City, because Gary abandoned the use. o City, because Gary needs to rebuild the building to continue the use.
Given Gary's situation, the most likely outcome of the lawsuit would be:
- City, because Gary abandoned the use.
In Maryland, if a nonconforming use is abandoned for an extended period, the property owner may lose the right to continue that nonconforming use. Since Gary spent over a year deciding whether to rebuild or retire, it may be considered an abandonment of the nonconforming use.
*. Pam is running for a seat in the state legislature. Herb, a resident of City who is an avid supporter of Pam’s candidacy, erects a neon sign on the lawn in front of his house which reads: “Elect Pam!” Because the sign is quite large (* feet high and * feet wide) and the neon letters blink on and off, it sometimes distracts motorists who are driving down the street. During the five days the sign has been in place, the sign has caused three minor traffic accidents, one of which almost crushed a small child. The City now adopts a zoning ordinance which prohibits any neon sign in a residential zone which is larger than * square feet. Herb sues City. Who will win the lawsuit? o Herb, unless his house is already burdened by valid CC&Rs that restrict political signs. o Herb, because the sign is a prior nonconforming use. o City, because the sign is a nuisance. o City, unless Herb can prove unnecessary hardship.
Case Rating: *
The City is likely to win the lawsuit because Herb's neon sign is considered a nuisance due to the traffic accidents it has caused. The zoning ordinance aimed at addressing safety concerns is a valid exercise of the city's police power.
Do you have any other legal questions or need further clarification on this issue?