Monday, July 14, 2014
Larissa Katz (Toronto) has posted Relativity of Title and Causa Possessionis (Book Chapter) on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
It is often said nowadays that to any dispute between those who claim possessory rights in a thing, the common law proposes a clear and simple answer: ‘first in time, stronger in right’. Whether the dispute is between a ‘true owner’ and a finder; between two finders; between a bailee and a thief; between two thieves; or between any other putative possessors, the same simple rule claims to tell us whose right is superior. This rule is attractive in its simplicity — temporal priority is all that matters when deciding these disputes — but it is also surprising in its disregard for all other possible considerations. Shouldn’t the law care about the type of possessory claims we are concerned with? Doesn’t it matter (for reasons going beyond the temporal priority of his claim) that one party is in possession as the true owner, or only as a thief, etc.? And don’t the prior interactions between the parties matter to the law, as well? For instance, shouldn’t it matter whether or not one party put the other party into possession in the first place? All these considerations seem to have moral salience when considering who should be entitled to possess a thing. It would be odd if the law took no notice of them.
In this paper, I argue that “first in time, stronger in right” fits best with a view of ownership, and all other rights to possess, as identical rights to exclude. I develop normative, conceptual and doctrinal arguments for another view of the relativity of title that is consistent with a subtler and richer account of ownership as a position of exclusive authority (one that is qualitatively different than other rights to possess). On this account, we resolve disputes among putative possessors in terms of their ‘causa possessionis’ — the normative ground of their claims to possession — and not merely in terms of the temporal priority of their claims. I argue that first in time is not always stronger in right, for these other considerations may sometimes trump temporal priority. Even when the ‘first in time’ rule generates the right answer, it does so in a way that obscures the larger normative framework that explains why that is the right answer.
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
The Atlantic Cities blog has a breezy piece about the zip codes with the highest median housing prices:
In the Bay Area, however, housing has become so expensive that much of the middle class has been effectively priced out of home-ownership. Forty-four ZIP codes have median home values above $1 million, just nine have median home values below $300,000, and not a single ZIP code has a median home value below $200,000. In neighboring San Jose, just one of the metro’s 59 ZIP codes had a median home value below $400,000.
The larger picture:
Overall, 33 ZIP codes have median home values of more than $2 million. Nearly all of these were located in the New York, Los Angeles, San Jose, or San Francisco metro areas, with 10 each in the New York metro and the combined San Francisco-San Jose Bay Area. There was one each in Boston, Miami, Santa Barbara, and San Diego.
Another 201 ZIP codes had median home values of more than $1 million. A whopping three-quarters of these were in just three coastal areas: New York, Los Angeles, and the San Francisco Bay Area. The Bay Area had the largest number, with 60 ZIP codes with median home values of more than $1 million: 44 in San Francisco and another 16 in San Jose. Another 52 were in greater New York, spanning both Manhattan and some second-home enclaves of the Hamptons. And 39 more were in Los Angeles and Orange County. The rest are in places like Boston, San Diego, and Stamford, Connecticut.
Continuing the week's theme on how America drinks, here's a map of the relative popularity of Starbucks drinks. (This doesn't mean that Denver's favorite drink is the tea latte. Rather, it indicates that Denverites order tea lattes at a higher percentage than the citizens of any other city):
Donald Kochan (Chapman) has posted Economic Analysis in the Fourth Generation of Environmental Law: What Role? (Journal of Environmental and Sustainability Law) on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
Written for the symposium "Environmental Law 4.0: Adaptive and Resilient" at the University of Missouri School of Law, this essay explores some of the issues of economic analysis that might arise as we approach the fourth generation of environmental law. It begins with explaining some of the ways that economic analysis can be employed to generate the best environmental rules, including measures under what this essay terms as "economics-based environmentalism."
This includes focusing on the adaptability of markets and the benefits of spontaneous order, the integration of economic principles into any polycentric toolbox of environmental law approaches, the use of property-based externalities' analysis, the use of existing property rights, the creation of property rights, the utility of greater reliance on common law principles and related compensation and liability approaches, the increased use of private contracting terms and private ordering in general to satisfy individual and societal preferences for environmental responses, and the power and responsibility of consumers to demand in the marketplace the provision of environmental goods and services and environmentally responsible behavior rather than relying on the government to instead act with coercion to satisfy such preferences. That portion of the essay concludes with a proposal that would embed in law a requirement that agencies prove the existence of market failure and the exhaustion of economic alternatives to governmental regulation before being allowed to proceed with any top-down, interventionist governmental regulation.
The last portion of the essay focuses on theories from law and economics, including those related to the self-perpetuating behavior of bureaucracies, public choice models of legislation and regulation, and capture theory as barriers to any effective reform in the emerging fourth generation of environmental law -- whether it be those reforms proposed by others or even those suggested earlier in the essay.
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Mindy Craig (PDF) makes the case that city parks need to move to fee-based system:
Setting fees is perhaps one of the most difficult areas for those parks professionals unfamiliar with having a revenue-generating focus. However, completing a comprehensive fee analysis and creating a strategy for revamping fees is a cornerstone of becoming a more entrepreneurial organization. City officials in San Jose undertook this type of evaluation when they realized they could not afford to operate all of the facilities and programs. The officials redesigned the fee structure and program-retention policy to adapt to market trends and community needs, and to dramatically increase their cost-recovery level. By creating a framework to inform every type of fee, like group classes, to higher fees for special-use activities, like wedding venues, programs and facilities became more self-sustaining. To mitigate access concerns for community members who cannot pay, the new fee policy includes scholarships for populations who need assistance. In addition, San Jose used this new policy to end low cost-recovery programs. In 2010-2011, the department reported a 97.4-percent cost-recovery rate!
Debra Stark (John Marshall), Jessica Choplin (DePaul), Joseph Mikels (DePaul), and Amber McDonnell (John Marshall) have posted Complex Decision-Making and Cognitive Aging Call for Enhanced Protection of Seniors Contemplating Reverse Mortgages (Arizona State Law Journal) on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
This article explains what reverse mortgages are and how they work. It also analyzes who could potentially benefit from them, but why this type of loan is so problematic for many seniors. The article then considers steps that can be taken to improve the effectiveness of current federal rules and counseling protocols to enable seniors to make well-informed decisions keeping in mind cognitive barriers and the complicated nature of this loan product.
Because many seniors may not be noticing the high costs associated with federally insured reverse mortgages, many believe these loans are now the product of choice for “predatory lending.”
Monday, July 7, 2014
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Federal Reserve Chairwoman's new neighbors are not happy:
WASHINGTON—In the Georgetown gated community of Hillandale, residents live in secluded calm governed by some 50 pages of rules banning fences, motorcycles, certain paint colors, tree species and excess dogs and cats (no more than two total per household).
"People come to live in Hillandale because of the quality of our residential community, and that is something that we need to maintain," says resident Sallie Forman.
Then one of the most powerful economic policy makers in the world moved in and, in the words of some here, ruined the neighborhood.
As neighbors tell it, earlier this year, the security detail protecting new Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen barreled through the cul-de-sac where she lives in oversize vans loaded with guns, cameras and takeout pizza. It established an "armed camp" next door to Ms. Forman's townhome, according to a written bill of grievances presented by concerned neighbors deeming the uniformed police presence "uncomfortable for residents of various religious persuasions," such as Quakers.
Security trucks, it continued, "weighing approximately 7,000 pounds each" sit idling on the street for "approximately 22 minutes daily" at each Yellen morning pickup. When Ms. Yellen leaves her home, a second truck then "speedily pulls out of the security driveway…all the while spilling fluid onto the street, which has now left a permanent stain." Hillandale bylaws expressly prohibit car fluid spills in the common areas.
This map of a nonscientific survey of 5,249 Americans shows that the nation has pretty terrible taste in beer. Note that the survey asked for the respondent's favorite beer, not the beer they drink the most often. While Bud Light (especially the highly alcoholic Bud Light Platinum) has it's place, this map reminds me of the old Monty Python joke: "How is American beer like making love in a canoe?" You can Google the punchline yourself, it's not fit for a family blog.
John Ruple (Utah) & Robert Keiter (Utah) have posted The Future of Federal-State Land Exchanges on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
Today, the land ownership map of the West in many places resembles a crazy quilt, without reason or coherent pattern. Often no single owner (states, private entities, or the Federal government) owns enough contiguous land to allow effective management of land holdings, and fragmented ownership patterns generate a plethora of disputes over access and similar problems.
While this paper focuses on examples from Utah, the challenges posed by a fragmented landscape and conflicting management objectives are much broader. Across the 11 contiguous Western states, state trust lands account for twice the acreage of National Parks and trust lands are often interspersed with protected or sensitive lands. Inholdings within National Forests, for example, total 14.3 million acres.9 While many inholdings are owned by private parties rather than state trust land agencies, the fact that National Forest inholdings in the 11 contiguous Western states account for more land than all of Maryland and Vermont combined indicates the scope of the problem.
Friday, July 4, 2014
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW seeks to expand its academic program and its strong commitment to scholarship by hiring two exceptional faculty candidates for tenure-track or tenured positions, with rank dependent on qualifications and experience. While the law school welcomes applications in all subject areas, it particularly invites applications in: (1) patent law (including related intellectual property subjects); and (2) legal analysis, research, and writing. Candidates must have a J.D. degree or its equivalent. Preference will be given to those with demonstrated outstanding scholarly achievement and strong classroom teaching skills.
This is an especially attractive time to join Texas A&M University School of Law. Since Texas A&M University acquired the law school from Texas Wesleyan University in August of 2013, applications for admission have increased by over 30 percent and development has grown exponentially, including multiple seven-figure endowed chairs. The law school is poised to build on its tradition of excellence in scholarship, teaching, and public service through the extensive resources and opportunities that result from being part of a world-class public university.
Texas A&M University School of Law is located in vibrant downtown Fort Worth. The Fort Worth/Dallas area, with a total population in excess of six million people, offers a low cost of living and a strong economy.
As an Equal Opportunity Employer, Texas A&M University welcomes applications from a broad spectrum of qualified individuals who will enhance the rich diversity of the law school’s academic community. Applicants should email a résumé and cover letter indicating research and teaching interests to Professor Timothy Mulvaney, Chair of the Faculty Appointments Committee, at email@example.com. Alternatively, résumés can be mailed to Professor Mulvaney at Texas A&M University School of Law, 1515 Commerce Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102-6509.
The papers from Vanderbilt's recent symposium on "The Role of Federal Law in Private Wealth Transfer" are now hitting SSRN. The Symposium featured a lot of the real heavy-hitters in T&E and is worth checking out. Of particular note for property profs is a paper by Josh Tate (SMU) on perpetuities. Here's the abstract for Tate's Perpetuities and the Genius of a Free State:
The recent rise of perpetual trusts has brought new attention to previously obscure state constitutional prohibitions of perpetuities. This comment examines the historical origins of the first such prohibition, Clause 23 of the 1776 North Carolina Constitution and Declaration of Rights, which provided that "perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to the genius of a free State, and ought not to be allowed." Although many good reasons can be offered for the provision, it is curiously absent from the constitutions of the twelve other original states. Why did this provision emerge only in North Carolina, and not in Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or any of the other “free states” that together rose up against their colonial masters?
This Comment suggests a possible answer to that question. Although the problems with perpetuities were well known to learned inhabitants of all the newly independent American states, those problems were particularly salient in North Carolina in 1776 due to that colony’s unique history as a former proprietary colony. The decision by the heir of one of the original Lords Proprietors not to sell his share back to the British crown gave rise to specific grievances in North Carolina that did not exist in the other twelve former colonies. Moreover, North Carolina was unique in witnessing a violent confrontation between the colonial authorities and backcountry farmers that stemmed in part from those grievances. The peculiar case of the Earl Granville and assorted problems in his Granville District shifted the problem of perpetuities from the periphery to the center of North Carolina politics in the late eighteenth century, and made perpetuities warrant an explicit mention in the 1776 North Carolina Constitution and Declaration of Rights.
Property Profs may also be interested in Rob Sitkoff and Steven Horowitz's work on Unconstitutional Perpetual Trusts.
Thursday, July 3, 2014
ALPS Conference 2015
The Association for Law, Property and Society (ALPS) will hold its sixth annual meeting at the University of Georgia School of Law on May 1-2, 2015. Details, including a call for papers and plenary speakers, will be announced later this summer. Save the dates on your calendar.
3. [102 downloads] No Sticks in My Bundle: Rethinking the Indian Land Tenure Problem
Jessica A. Shoemaker (Nebraska)
4. [86 downloads] Properties of Information & the Legal Implications of Same
Tim Wu (Columbia)
5. [82 downloads] Reinventing the Islamic Law of Inheritance: The Share of Orphaned Grandchild in Islam and Pakistani Legal System
Muhammad Munir (International Islamic University)
6. [81 downloads] The Law Is Nine-Tenths of Possession: An Adage Turned on Its Head
Carol M. Rose (Arizona)
7. [77 downloads] A Case for Simpler Gain Bifurcation for Real Estate Developers
Bradley T. Borden (Brooklyn), Nathan Brown (Independent), & John Wagner (Independent)
10. [70 downloads] The Stripping of the Trust: A Study in Legal Evolution
Adam S. Hofri-Winogradow (Hebrew University)
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Arkansas is one of the worst places to be a renter in America. It is the only state in the US where tenants are treated as criminals for paying rent late and landlords are not required by law to maintain their properties. Its failure-to-vacate law lets landlords give tenants a 10-day eviction notice if they are even one day overdue. Tenants who can't or won't leave within that span face fines for every day they remain on the property and up to 90 days in jail. This makes things difficult for the third of Arkansas's residents who are renters and have legitimate concerns about the properties they are occupying.
The combination of failure-to-vacate and the lack of warranty of habitability make it almost impossible for tenants to challenge their landlords for legitimate reasons. It's estimated that criminal evictions occur everyday in Arkansas, resulting in over 2000 failure-to-vacate cases being filed each year.
Anna di Robilant (Boston U.) has posted Property: A Bundle of Sticks or a Tree? (Vanderbilt Law Review) on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
In the United States, property debates revolve around two conceptual models of property: the ownership model, originally developed in Europe and now revisited by information theorists and classical liberal theorists of property, and the bundle of rights model, invented in the United States by Hohfeld and the Realists. This article retrieves an alternative concept of property, the tree concept of property. The tree concept of property was developed by European property scholars between 1900 and the 1950s, as part of Europe’s own “realist” moment. It envisions property as a tree: the trunk representing the owner’s right to govern the use of a resource, and the branches representing the many resource-specific property regimes present in modern legal systems (family property, agricultural property, affordable housing property, intellectual property etc.). This article argues that the tree concept of property provides a descriptively more accurate and normatively richer account of property than the two currently dominant models.
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Nuns take on a strip club in Stone Park, Ill:
The nuns want to see the strip club gone. Last week, they filed a lawsuit against the owners of Club Allure, which opened last year just over the backyard fence from the quiet convent where close to two dozen nuns live.
The nuns aired a long list of grievances: They have been forced to endure loud, pulsating music at night that interrupts their prayers; blinking neon lights that are visible from outside the club; and trash littering the area, including used syringes, empty whiskey bottles and discarded condoms. They also charge that the Village of Stone Park, which is named in the lawsuit, illegally permitted the club to be built despite an Illinois requirement of a 1,000-foot buffer between adult entertainment businesses and places of worship.
[...] The proprietors of the club insist that their presence is perfectly legal and that they have no reason to leave. Sean O’Brien, a managing partner, watched the nuns from the club’s nearly empty parking lot on Wednesday, taking nervous sips from a bottle of Fiji water. “I grew up Catholic, so I do understand all of this,” said Mr. O’Brien, 40. “They make us out to be monsters. But we treat the girls who work here like daughters.” (He then admitted to feeling “a little bit” like a bad Catholic.)
The New York Times has a nifty interactive map are healthy & wealthy, or struggling. Life in Kentucky, it turns out, is rough sledding.
Annie Lowrey writes in the Times Magazine this week about the troubles of Clay County, Ky., which by several measures is the hardest place in America to live. The Upshot came to this conclusion by looking at six data points for each county in the United States: education (percentage of residents with at least a bachelor’s degree), median household income, unemployment rate, disability rate, life expectancy and obesity. We then averaged each county’s relative rank in these categories to create an overall ranking.
[...] The 10 lowest counties in the country, by this ranking, include a cluster of six in the Appalachian Mountains of eastern Kentucky (Breathitt, Clay, Jackson, Lee, Leslie and Magoffin), along with four others in various parts of the rural South: Humphreys County, Miss.; East Carroll Parish, La.; Jefferson County, Ga.; and Lee County, Ark.
(HT: Jessie Owley)
Daniel Fitzpatrick (Australian National University) has posted Rules of Possession Re-Visited: Property and the Problem of Social Order (Law and Social Inquiry) on SSRN. Here's the abstract:
This article explores two propositions in the literature on rules of possession. The first is that rules of first possession may form the basis for "spontaneous order". The article argues that this proposition must take into account a constitutive relationship between property and authority, including the potential for social disorder when competition for possession combines with competition for public authority. The second is that simple rules of possession provide a baseline response to the problem of social order, because of the information costs of property in a large audience context. The article argues that this proposition must take into account correlations between interpretive complexity in rules of possession, and the reproduction of authority and social order in circumstances of threatened social disorder. The analysis highlights the significance of authority and enforcement for the design of rules of possession and their relationship with social order.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
A great article in the Washington Post on the backlash against renovated townhouses that look to take maximum advantage of D.C.'s limitations on building height.
They’re like skyscrapers in small villages: renovated townhouses — but between 40 and 65 feet high — right next to squat, two-story rowhouses in Washington neighborhoods from Petworth to NoMa to Adams Morgan.
Their common nickname: pop-ups. Their common epithet among neighbors and on local blogs: monsters. Middle Fingers.
These skyward-extending residences are spreading across the city, fueled by small developers eager to cash in on the District’s real estate boom and seize any inch of available real estate, which these days means vertical empty space. Though developers have the right to build upward — and say they are providing needed housing stock — the city is evaluating how it can ensure that pop-ups in some neighborhoods reflect their community’s character.
[...] Anyone can drive around the District and find them. The five-story building at 1013 V St. NW dubbed “the Monster” is the most notorious. But the pop-up bible is the PoPville blog, which for several years has chronicled the advance of pop-ups with the same curiosity people had when McMansions began cropping up on old farms in Northern Virginia. (The “PoP” in the blog’s name stands for Prince of Petworth, the Web site’s original name.) Dan Silverman, the site’s publisher, frequently posts his and readers’ comments, along with photographs of some of the more unusual buildings.