Quiz 50: Insurance

Person M has previously sold a tract of land to Person R using a quitclaim deed. At that time he was not sure regarding whether he had the full title to that property or not. Later on, when Person M came to know that he had full title to the land, he sold the land to Person L by warranty deed. Person L was also aware of the previous deal; however she purchased the land and then sued to evict Person R from the land. It needs to be decided that whether Person L would get the title to the land. Quitclaim deed provides the least protection to a person against any defects in the title. In case, the grantor has no interest in a land, then the grantee would not receive any interest. Contrary to this, a warranty deed provides the greatest protection to a person by providing him the greatest number of warranties. In this case, Person R would probably be the winner. Although a quitclaim deed is the least protective deed, it covers the seller's entire interest. In this case, Person M's interest included the entire piece of property. Thus, Person R would receive the entire parcel of land. On the other hand, Person L had knowledge of the previous sale of land to Person R, but she chose to ignore it when transacting with Person R. Thus, she was not a bona fide purchaser like Person R. Since, Person R is a bona fide purchaser and his deed was recorded, the court would probably find for Person R.

Rights under trial A trial basically refers to representation of information acting as a evidence in a tribunal by the parties involves in the dispute. Thus the legal authority under a formal setting resolves the disputes and claims of the parties. In other words the plaintiff files the case to have proceeding on the dispute, where the opposing party support his claim or dispute with relevant evidence in front of the judge in the tribunal In this case, S is the owner of two storey building which is adjacent to the public park and a popular golf course. Thus after two months S leases his second floor for nine months to L however L further provided possession of the leased property to J who is a local artist. Since the paint used by the artist caused damage to the S property and S filed a trial against the same. Hence it is ascertained that it is the case of easement (a right to otherwise use or cross other person land pertaining to specific motive) which provide non possessionary limited right pertaining to trial to walk on S land .

Eviction: Constructive eviction occurs when a landlord deliberately makes a place unlivable that a tenant moves out. In this case James did not take action to make the location conform to the express covenant of quiet enjoyment as stated in the lease, thereby interfering with Juan's use and enjoyment of the premises. James' leasing to a loud nightclub could have had the foreseeable conclusion that the noise would breach the agreement terms supporting quiet enjoyment, and therefore James could be held liable. The elements for a constructive eviction are as follows: 1. Failure of a landlord to remedy a situation under his/her control that is rendering the rental unit uninhabitable. 2. A failure by the landlord to act, which renders the unit uninhabitable. Must be proven that the landlord and not another tenant made the unit uninhabitable. 3. The tenant's abandonment of the unit after a reasonable amount of time has passed. The tenant must notify the landlord of the conditions rending the unit unlivable in writing before moving, but most states do not have a required wait period before the tenant can leave. A tenant who has been constructively evicted can sue the landlord to be relieved of rent obligations from a lease and recoup moving expenses or other damages relating to the cause of the eviction.