Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Implied 'Secondary Easement' Rights: What Exactly Does that Easement Grant?
'Developer' builds two commercial centers at a busy intersection. The first center is anchored by 'Wally's,' a large general merchandise store upon whose property is located the shopping center's pylon sign on which Developer has retained advertising rights via a sign easement. 'Margo's Market,' (Margo's) one of Wally's main competitors, enters a lease to anchor Developer's second shopping center, and Developer assigns Margo's the 'right to advertise on' the pylon sign in the Wally's center. Sixty days before opening, Margo's attempts to install its identification panel on the pylon sign on Wally's property, but Wally's denies access to Margo's and notifies Margo's that the easement retained by Developer did not provide any access rights to the Wally's center. Does Margo's have access rights to the Wally's center, or was Developer's reservation of rights defective? The answer to this question lies in the theory of implied easement rights, known as 'secondary easements,' that accompany express easement grants.
In preparing or analyzing easements necessary to a commercial development, attorneys too often fail to focus on easement language as closely as they do on the more complex contracts and restrictions necessary to bring the development together. Recognizing and understanding secondary easements is important in order to help clients understand what rights are granted or received in an easement agreement and to address issues in the easement grant in order to avoid future disputes. This article addresses the basic theory behind secondary easements and offers some practical considerations in negotiating and drafting easements.
Implied Rights in Secondary Easements
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?