Sign In Sign Up Ask an AI advisor
themajesty9898
themajesty9898
09.07.2021 • 
Social Studies

Two farmers who own adjacent farms decided to construct a small road that straddles their common property line. They entered into a written agreement whereby each granted to the other a right of access over his property in accord with the dimensions and location of the road and each promised that he, his heirs, devisees, assignees, and successors would equally share the repair and maintenance of the road with the neighboring property owner. This agreement was promptly and properly recorded. After the road was built, one of the farmers sold his farm in fee simple absolute to a rancher. A year ago, the other farmer died. His property passed by intestacy to his son. Through an oral agreement, the son leased the inherited farm to another farmer for a one-year term. The son told the new farmer of the shared maintenance agreement with the rancher, but otherwise did not discuss the maintenance of the road with the new farmer. This past spring, due to heavy flooding, the maintenance of the road was costly. When the new farmer contacted the rancher, the rancher, noting that he rarely used the road and preferred the public highway that abutted his property, refused to reimburse the farmer for the maintenance expenditures. Under which of the following theories can the new farmer successfully recover half of the costs for maintenance from the rancher? A. The agreement contains a covenant that runs with the land.
B. Detrimental reliance on the son's revelation of the shared maintenance agreement.
C. The agreement contains an easement.
D. The agreement contains an equitable servitude.

Solved
Show answers

Ask an AI advisor a question

I want advice