Real Property:

FHA
The Fair Housing Act bars discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability
in the sale or rental of a dwelling. Discrimination against families with children (familial status) is also
barred, except in senior citizen housing.
A. Exemptions:
1. Owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units in which persons live independently
of each other; and
2. Single-family homes sold or rented by an owner who owns no more than three single-family
homes.
Note that the Act also exempts religious organizations and private clubs from its application
to the extent that such organizations may give preference to persons of the same religion or
members of the club when selling or renting property for a non-commercial purpose.
B. Prohibited Actions Under the Fair Housing Act: It is unlawful to take any of the following
actions because of a person’s race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national
origin: a) Refuse to negotiate, rent, or sell housing;
b) Provide different terms, conditions, or privileges for the sale or rental of a dwelling;
c) Falsely represent that a dwelling is not available for inspection, sale, or rental;
d) Induce or attempt to induce a person (for profit) to sell or rent a dwelling by making
representations that persons of a particular protected characteristic are moving into the
neighborhood;
e) Refuse to make available a mortgage loan or other financial assistance or provide
different terms or conditions for such transactions.
C. Discriminatory Advertisements Also Prohibited:
There are no exemptions for owner-occupied buildings or owner sales and rentals of single-
family homes in relation to advertising, meaning this prohibition applies even if the property
being advertised is exempt from the other provisions of the Act.
D. Reasonable Accommodations

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT:

The CRA does not cover advertising.
The Civil Rights Act bars racial or ethnic discrimination in the sale or rental of all property.

Concurrent interests:
Joint Tenancy:
Joint tenancy is severed in the title theory state but not in lien theory states
 Both lien theory and title theory are legal frameworks for handling mortgages in the United
States, but they differ in how they treat ownership of the property during the loan period and how
foreclosures are handled.

Title Theory:

 Lender holds title: In title theory states, the lender (usually a bank) holds the legal title to the
property until the loan is paid off in full. This means the lender is listed as the owner on the deed.
 Deed of trust: The loan document used is a deed of trust, which transfers the title to a trustee
who holds it for the benefit of the lender.
 Foreclosure: Foreclosure is a non-judicial process, meaning it doesn't require a court order. The
trustee sells the property at a public auction to recoup the debt.
 States: Examples of title theory states include California, Arizona, Colorado, and Nevada.

Lien Theory:

 Borrower holds title: In lien theory states, the borrower keeps the legal title to the property
throughout the loan period. The lender gets a lien on the property, which gives them the right to
seize it if the loan is not repaid.
 Mortgage: The loan document used is a mortgage, which creates a lien on the property.
 Foreclosure: Foreclosure is a judicial process, meaning it requires a court order. The lender
must file a lawsuit to have the property sold.
 States: Examples of lien theory states include Texas, Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania.

Additional differences:

 Tax implications: In title theory states, the lender pays property taxes while they hold the title.
In lien theory states, the borrower continues to pay property taxes.
 Selling the property: In title theory states, the lender and the buyer must work together to
transfer the title when the property is sold. In lien theory states, the sale proceeds are used to pay
off the lien before the title is transferred to the buyer.

Joint tenancy can be alienable without spouse consent but not in a tenancy in its entirety.

Tenancy in Common:

When co-owners of property disagree on how to proceed, they might need to consider partition,
which involves dividing the ownership or selling the property and distributing the proceeds. Two
main options exist: partition in kind and partition by sale. Let's explore their key differences:

Partition in Kind:
 Concept: Physically dividing the property into separate portions, each reflecting the co-owners'
ownership percentages.
 Suitable: Best suited for divisible properties like land with clear boundaries, multiple
buildings, or easily separable resources.
 Advantages:
o More affordable compared to selling and avoids market fluctuations.
o Each co-owner receives a specific piece of property they can manage independently.
o Preserves sentimental value attached to the property, if applicable.
 Disadvantages:
o Not feasible for indivisible properties like single-family homes.
o Unequal division might be challenging or unfair if property features are not easily separable.
o Potential conflict about the value and fairness of each divided portion.

Partition by Sale:

 Concept: Selling the entire property through a real estate agent or auction and dividing the
proceeds based on ownership percentages.
 Suitable: Ideal for indivisible properties, situations where co-owners cannot agree on
division, or when maximizing the property's value is a priority.
 Advantages:
o Provides a clean break for co-owners who want to sever ties completely.
o Ensures a fair market value for the property through competitive bidding.
o Eliminates future ownership disputes.
 Disadvantages:
o Involves costs associated with selling (agent fees, marketing, closing costs).
o Market fluctuations could impact the final sale price and distribution.
o May lead to sentimental loss for co-owners attached to the property.

Determining the Best Option:

Several factors influence which option is most suitable:

 Property type: Can it be physically divided fairly?

 Ownership percentages: Are they easily reflected in division?
 Co-owners' goals: Do they prioritize maximizing value, a clean break, or retaining a portion of
the property?
 Financial considerations: Can co-owners afford the costs associated with each option?
 Emotional attachment: Does the property hold sentimental value for any co-owner?

Marital Property:
Keep in mind that marital property only exists (ironically) at divorce. If the couple never
divorces, there never is marital property to divide equitably. At death, there is no marital
property — each spouse may dispose of his or her own separate property as s/he sees fit. But in
most states, the surviving spouse may take a spousal elective share(usually either 1/3rd or 1/2 of the
total estate of the decedent spouse) in lieu of whatever s/he received from the decedent spouse’s
 estate. The purpose of the spousal elective share is to prevent the impoverishment of the surviving
spouse.

There are no elective shares in community property

Tenancy by Entirety:

No, an equitable distribution state is not the same as a community property state.

Equitable Distribution States:

 Most common: 41 out of 50 states follow this system.

 Fairness over equality: Courts divide marital property in a way they deem fair and
just, considering factors like:
o Length of the marriage
o Each spouse's financial contributions
o Child custody arrangements
o Marital misconduct
o Each spouse's needs
 No automatic 50/50 split: Judges have more discretion in deciding how assets and debts are
distributed.

Community Property States:

 Less common: 9 states (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New

Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin) function under this system.
 Presumption of equality: All property acquired during the marriage is presumed to be equally
owned by both spouses, regardless of who earned it.
 50/50 split: In most cases, property is divided equally regardless of individual contributions or
circumstances. Exceptions exist like prenups or inheritance.

Key Differences:

 Starting point: In community property states, the starting point is a 50/50 split, requiring
justification for deviations. In equitable distribution, fairness and individual circumstances
dictate the division.
 Judge's discretion: Judges have more discretion in equitable distribution states, offering
flexibility but potentially leading to longer and more complex proceedings.
 Predictability: Community property states offer more predictability with the presumed 50/50
split, potentially saving time and legal costs.

LEASEHOLD ESTATES:
Is notice required to terminate a Tenancy at Will?
Yes, to the lessee (not the lessor).

OBLIGATION OF LANDLORD AND TENANTS:

ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLEASES:
Assignment :
Landlord to tenant – Privity of Contract
Tenant(Assignor) to Assignee – Privity of Contract
Landlord to Assignee – Privity of Estate
SUBLEASE:
Landlord to tenant – Privity of Contract + Privity of Estate
Tenant(SubLessor) to Sub lessee – Privity of Contract + Privity of Estate
Landlord to Sub lessee – Nothing

Constructive eviction:
 Physical interference
 Both residential and commercial
Implied warranty of habitability:
 Residential leases
 Cannot be waived
 Must be fit for basic human habitation.

Remedies for the tenant under implied warranty of habitability:

1. Move out,
2. Repair and deduct cost of repairs from rent,
3. Reduce rent to fair value in face of defects or withhold all rent until court determines fair value
(must escrow withheld rent to show good faith).,
4. Remain and sue landlord for damages.

Yes
 Lead paint
 Garbage – trash pickup – cockroaches infestation
No
 High crime and the front bolt not working
 Dishwasher not working
 Cannot tell - smoking of neighbor – objective have to consider other
conditions

 A. Implied Warranty of Habitability: premises are safe, clean and fit for human
habitation at the time of lease execution; LL will maintain and repair the premises during
the lease term. No waiver permitted
 B. Breach of Warranty of Habitability Test
 (i) Defect must be substantial considering its violation of the applicable housing code,
effect on T health or safety, length of time condition existed, seriousness
 (ii) Landlord notice of the defective condition
 (iii) Landlord given reasonable time to repair the defect and had not done so
TAKINGS
What three factors does a court weigh to determine if a regulation goes "too far" and constitutes
a taking?
(1) extent of economic loss suffered by the property owner,
(2) whether the property owner's investment-backed expectations were reasonable,
(3) whether the property owner enjoys an average reciprocity of advantage.

Easements:
Definition:
Classification:
Creation: PIEE: Prescription; Implied – by necessity or by prior use; Express – Grant,
Reservation; Estoppel.
Express - SOF requirement
A statute requiring certain contracts to be in writing and signed by the parties bound by
the contract. The purpose is to prevent fraud and other injury. The most common types of
contracts to which the statute applies are contracts that involve the sale or transfer of land,
and contracts that cannot be completed within one year.

1. Must be in writing
2. Signed by the person

Scope:
Transferability:
Termination: