Peninsula Open Space Trust v. Redwood Trust Deed Services, Inc.

The Land Court held that the open space restriction was not a direct or indirect unreasonable restraint on alienation.

The trial court found 1) the easement’s prohibition on division was unambiguous and not an unreasonable restraint on alienation, 2) the conveyance could be rescinded, 3) the defense of laches was not appropriate and 4) holders were entitled to enforcement costs and attorney fees.

California superior court orders a preliminary injunction in easement violation case acknowledging that unified ownership of conservation property promotes good stewardship of the land.

An appellate court in Ohio has upheld a division prohibition in a conservation easement The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision to nullify the division prohibition.

The State and County objected to the tax foreclosure due to the division prohibition. The trial court agreed. The appellate court reversed, finding that revenue-raising outweighed the state goal of keeping whole farms intact. The court ruled the conservation easement survived the foreclosure.

This is a template created by the Land Trust Alliance to help organizations develop a written policy to guide land sale transactions.

Baseline example from the accredited Peninsula Open Space Trust.

The trial court ruled that Parcel B-2 was indeed an open space area because it was situated similarly to the other open space areas on the survey. The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed, holding that the survey was ambiguous.

The trial court granted WLT's motion for summary judgment, finding that the proposed wolf habitat facility would violate the conservation easement.