Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules engagement rings to be conditional gifts

Overruling its precedent from 1959, the high court in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts joins the modern approach by holding that engagement rings should be returned to the giver if the engagement falls through without regard to whose fault it is that the engagement was called off. Johnson v. Settino, 2024 WL 4714383 (Mass. 2024) (overruling DeCicco v. Barker, 159 N.E.2d 534 (Mass. 1959)). The ruling makes the issue consistent with the no fault divorce regime that eschews consideration of fault in dissolving marriages. The ring is considered a conditional gift that only becomes permanent when the engagement results in a marriage.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules engagement rings to be conditional gifts Read More »

HOA cannot prohibit short-term leasing if original covenants contained no restraints on alienation

A North Carolina court refused to allow a homeowners association (HOA) to amend its covenants to ba short-term leasing (leasing for less than 90 days) even though the HOA followed the correct procedures to amend the covenants and nothing limited their power to adopt the restriction. McDougald v. White Oak Plantation Homeowners Ass’n, 904 S.E.2d 180 (N.C. Ct. App. 2024). The modern approach to covenants tends to see them as valuable property rights and the ability of an association to “govern” the association by imposing limits on land use as a welcome power, the traditional approach viewed covenants as meddlesome encumbrances on ownership that burden an owner’s freedom to use their property as they see fit, especially when ownership is held in fee simple. These contrasting attitudes mean that the modern approach interprets ambiguities in the declaration to achieve the intent of the grantor and perhaps even to give the

HOA cannot prohibit short-term leasing if original covenants contained no restraints on alienation Read More »

Police damage to house not compensable under the takings clause

In an upsetting but not surprising decision, the Sixth Circuit has held that damage to property caused by police in the course of their duties, including finding and apprehending those who committed or are suspected of having committed a crime, is not compensable as a “taking” of property within the meaning of the Takings Clause of the US Constitution. Slaybaugh v. Rutherford Cnty., 2024 WL 4020769 (6th Cir. 2024). In this case, a mother and son were in her house and she could not convince him to give himself up to the police. She exited the home and they fired 35 tear gas cannisters into the home, causing $70,000 of damage to the house and the contents inside. The insurance company would not cover the loss because it was “self-inflicted” and the owner’s suit against the city failed because the longstanding rule is that the police cannot be hampered in

Police damage to house not compensable under the takings clause Read More »

Promise to make a gift at death enforceable if relied on by continued cohabitation

The New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that a promise to give a gift at death if she continued to live with him until his death is enforceable even though it does not satisfy the state statute of wills if the promisor receives consideration for the promise, and continued cohabitation after the promise suffices. Tremblay v. Bald, 2024 WL 332101 (N.H. 2024). The contract was enforceable even though the decedent died intestate and could have, but did not, convert the written promise into a formal will.

Promise to make a gift at death enforceable if relied on by continued cohabitation Read More »

Violation of fair housing statute is a defense to eviction

The Colorado Supreme Court has held that a landlord who has violated fair housing laws may be disabled from evicted the tenant who was the victim of that discrimination. Miller v. Amos, 543 P.3d 393 (Colo. 2024). The court reasoned that the statutory rights to be free from discrimination not only provide claims but can operate as a valid defense to an assertion of property rights. In this case, the landlord repeatedly demanded that the tenant have sex with him. When she refused, he sued to evict her. In that eviction action, she raised the state fair housing statute as a defense (sexual harassment constitutes sex discrimination), and the state supreme court agreed that the state fair housing law could be used as a defense when the the lease was an oral one that otherwise could be terminated for any reason.

Violation of fair housing statute is a defense to eviction Read More »

Property tax assessments can violate Fair Housing Act if disproportionately high in communities of color

The New York Court of Appeals has held that a municipal tax assessment practice may violate the federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601 et seq.. if assessments are higher without justification in areas of the city disproportionately inhabited by non-white residents. Tax Equity Now N.Y., LLC v. City of New York, 2024 WL 1160498 (N.Y. 2024). The court also held that these practices may perpetuate segregation. Both the disparate impact because of race and ethnicity and the perpetuation of segregation constitute prima facie claims of disparate impact discrimination under federal regulations. As a factual matter, the trial court found that similar properties in comparable neighborhoods were being assessed at extremely different rates.

Property tax assessments can violate Fair Housing Act if disproportionately high in communities of color Read More »

Tribe is awarded $400 million in trespass damages against a railroad company that exceeded the scope of an express easement

A federal court in Washington has awarded damages of $400 million to The Swinomish Indian Tribal Community to be paid by a railroad company (BNSF Railway Company) for knowingly exceeding the scope of a railroad easement on the tribe’s property. Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. BNSF Rwy. Co., 2024 WL 3027911, 2024 US. Dist. LEXIS 107314 (W.D. Wash. 2024). Federal common law governs a claim for trespass on Indian lands. The railroad company breached its easement agreement by unilaterally increasing the number of trains and the number of cars crossing tribal land without the tribe’s written consent. The court had found that the railroad company breached a right-of-way easement agreement with the tribe, and that the trespass was “willful, conscious, and knowing throughout the trespass period.” Swinomish Indian Tribal Cmty. v. BNSF Rwy. Co., 664 F.Supp.3d 1218 (W.D. Wash. 2023). In the remedies phase, the court held that disgorgement of

Tribe is awarded $400 million in trespass damages against a railroad company that exceeded the scope of an express easement Read More »

Landlord not liable for negligence if tenant did not notify landlord of the dangerous condition

The North Carolina Supreme Court held that a landlord cannot be held liable for negligence in failing to correct a dangerous condition if the tenant has not told the landlord about it so that the landlord had the chance to fix it before it caused harm. Terry v. Pub. Serv. Co. of N.C., Inc., 898 S.E.2d 648 (N.C. 2024).

Landlord not liable for negligence if tenant did not notify landlord of the dangerous condition Read More »

Scroll to Top