Condemning property and liability of storage
Please read those 3 Cases below. Discuss how and why you think or found those 3 cases below are most challenging?
1. BOSTON & THE LAND OWNERS
The City of Boston sought to condemn land in fee simply for use in constructing an entrance to an underground terminal for a subway. The owners of the land contend that no more than surface and subsurface easements are necessary for the terminal entrance and seek to retain air rights above 36 feet. The city argues that any building using this airspace would require structural supports that would interfere with the city's plan for the terminal. The city concedes that the properties around the condemned property could be assembled and structures could be designed to span over the condemned property, in which case the air rights would be quite valuable. Can the city condemn the property?
2. HINES, ARNETT & BUTLER
Hines stored her furniture, including a grand piano, in Arnett's warehouse. Needing more space, Arnett stored Hines's piano in Butler's warehouse next door. As a result of a fire, which occurred without any fault of Arnett or Butler, both warehouses and their contents were destroyed. Hines sues Arnett for the value of her piano and furniture. Decision?
3. ADAM & CARL
Alan issues a $500 note to Bonnie due six months from the date issued. One month later, Bonnie negotiates the note to Carl for $250 in cash and a check for $250. To what extent is Carl an HDC of the note?
https://brainmass.com/business/business-law/condemning-property-liability-storage-561595
Let's take a look at each of the three cases.
1 -- I discussed this case extensively in posting #559339. The main problem is determining who owns the airspace and if the airspace should be dedicated to the terminal due to its use. The owners contend that no more than surface and subsurface elements are needed, but the fact remains that we are installing a subway terminal. Due to the technological components and considering changing technology, we would have a major problem if we (the court) decide that the airspace could be used by surrounding developers or owners, and then find that their development interferes with our subway communications. This would present a legal fiasco and would be a threat to passenger safety.
2 -- In this case, Hines stored her furniture in a warehouse. The warehouse owner moved Hines furniture ...
This solution discusses the most challenging aspects of the three cases listed.
Legal Duies of Landlords and Tenants
Brazil and Bio-fuels