U & ME Homes LLC v. County of Suffolk
Source
About This Legal Opinion
The trial court granted summary judgment for the LLC and denied summary judgment to the Town and County. Following well-developed New York common law, the court ruled that the deed restriction did not include any language evidencing the requisite intent to run with the land.
Membership Required
This resource is a Land Trust Alliance member benefit for the staff, board and volunteers of land trust and affiliate member organizations, and Alliance donors at the Protector level.
Farley v. Town of Rhinebeck
The Trial Court ruled on summary judgment to dismiss any claims against SHLT based on New York's recreational use statute.
Canyon Meadows Homeowners Assoc. v. Wasatch County
In a quiet title suit against the new owner to affirm the enforceability of the restrictive covenant, the trial court held that the covenant was not enforceable, as there was no requisite intent that it run with the land.
Fletcher v. Ferry
Appeal of a lower court ruling that a deed restriction prohibiting mobile homes applied to manufactured homes. The court reversed and remanded for additional findings on the intent of grantor when executing the deed containing the deed restrictions.
Kiernat et al. v. County of Chisago
The court held that the conservation easement did not grant the landowner any new rights and did not preempt the County ordinance.
Westchester Land Trust v. Town of Lewisboro
The trial court granted WLT's motion for summary judgment, finding that the proposed wolf habitat facility would violate the conservation easement.
Ivey Branch Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner
In an unpublished order, the Tax Court denied the IRS’ motion for summary judgment reserving the proceeds issue for trial, found the deemed approval provision as not fatal because of the limitations, and rejected that the building area was “moveable.”
Bruzewicz v. United States tax court opinion
The District Court ruled for the IRS on summary judgment, holding that the failure to comply with I.R.C. § 170(f)(8) was, in and of itself, fatal to the deduction claim. The court rejected substantial compliance.
Lumpkin HC, LLC v. Commissioner
In a proceeds clause case with the improvement deduction language, the Tax Court denied the deductions in full, following Oakbrook Land Holdings LLC, v. Commissioner and Coal Property Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner. The Tax Court declined to consider the IRS' argument on the floating building areas.
Rock Spring, LLC v. Commissioner
The Tax Court denied summary judgment, agreeing with the taxpayer that both compliance with the regulation for a “qualified appraiser” and supplying “a description of the property in sufficient detail” required further factual development.
Bruzewicz v. United States
The District Court ruled for the IRS on summary judgment, holding that the failure to comply with I.R.C. 170(f)(8) was fatal to the deduction. The court rejected a substantial compliance argument in this respect.