PROPERTY OVERVIEW
Property law gives owners rights over non-owners
a. Right to exclude non-owners from property
b. Imposes duty on others not to enter without consent
c. Power to transfer title
d. Immunity from having property taken or damaged without consent
e. Privilege to use = power over people
i. pros: creates jobs
ii. harms: causes pollution, inadequate distribution of resources
Rights can be disaggregated (given up)
Landlords
a. grant tenants possession rights
b. in exchange, get periodic rental payments
c. still, they retain the right to regain possession at the end of the lease, despite the foreign occupancy
Ownership entails
1. Right to exclude access
2. Privilege to use
3. Power to transfer
4. Immunity from loss
5. Contractual Freedom
Reasonableness requirements
a. may encourage compromise more than clear (bright line) legal rules might
b. lowers cost of owning property
c. social consequences
d. gives the choice to the courts about which rule, broad or narrow, best promotes social welfare.
CONQUEST
Johnson v. McIntosh [Supreme Court] ( 1823 )
FACTS: Johnson had a contract from the Piankashaw Indians. M'Intosh had one from the Federal government.
Court agrees that at the time of plaintiff's contract, "the whole territory was owned by Indian Soverigns with to allegiances to European powers." Indian sovereigns were unrecognized and their land wasn't protected from conquest.
HOLDING: The US government's deed usurped the power of the baseless Indian deed. Indian deed is invalid because it gives away land not owned by the Indians -- taken by US through conquest.
RATIONALE: Marshall feels sympathetic to the Indians, but has to rule this way because of public policy. The US couldn't have Indian tribes claiming title to land all over the country.
State v. Shack
Cause of Action: Trespass
Main Idea: Right to Exclude
RATIONALE: The law doesn't want landowners to have an undue control over tenants lives.
EXCEPTIONS TO TRESSPASS
-significant need
-public policy
-privilege
-public policy can be important enough
Does the owner of the land have to be explicit in warning others not to trespass?
Property law gives owners rights over non-owners
a. Right to exclude non-owners from property
b. Imposes duty on others not to enter without consent
c. Power to transfer title
d. Immunity from having property taken or damaged without consent
e. Privilege to use = power over people
i. pros: creates jobs
ii. harms: causes pollution, inadequate distribution of resources
Rights can be disaggregated (given up)
Landlords
a. grant tenants possession rights
b. in exchange, get periodic rental payments
c. still, they retain the right to regain possession at the end of the lease, despite the foreign occupancy
Ownership entails
1. Right to exclude access
2. Privilege to use
3. Power to transfer
4. Immunity from loss
5. Contractual Freedom
Reasonableness requirements
a. may encourage compromise more than clear (bright line) legal rules might
b. lowers cost of owning property
c. social consequences
d. gives the choice to the courts about which rule, broad or narrow, best promotes social welfare.
CONQUEST
Johnson v. McIntosh [Supreme Court] ( 1823 )
FACTS: Johnson had a contract from the Piankashaw Indians. M'Intosh had one from the Federal government.
Court agrees that at the time of plaintiff's contract, "the whole territory was owned by Indian Soverigns with to allegiances to European powers." Indian sovereigns were unrecognized and their land wasn't protected from conquest.
HOLDING: The US government's deed usurped the power of the baseless Indian deed. Indian deed is invalid because it gives away land not owned by the Indians -- taken by US through conquest.
RATIONALE: Marshall feels sympathetic to the Indians, but has to rule this way because of public policy. The US couldn't have Indian tribes claiming title to land all over the country.
State v. Shack
Cause of Action: Trespass
Main Idea: Right to Exclude
RATIONALE: The law doesn't want landowners to have an undue control over tenants lives.
EXCEPTIONS TO TRESSPASS
-significant need
-public policy
-privilege
-public policy can be important enough
Does the owner of the land have to be explicit in warning others not to trespass?
- Overview, Ownership, Conquest, Conversion,
|
|