Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Paul Smith's College of Arts and Sciences v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Ogdensburg 2020 WL 5549734 AppDiv, Third Dept., 9/17/20 (Opinion by Garry, P.J.)
In an action by a private college for a determination that it owned property in fee simple, the college appealed from Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment to the Roman Catholic Diocese. The Appellate Division reversed, holding that because the diocese initially acquired a fee simple determinable, and the diocese had stopped using the property for church purposes, the private college, as the grantor's successor, had acquired a fee simple absolute in the property.
In 1896, Paul Smith's Hotel company transferred property to the Bishop of Ogdensburg by a deed which provided that the property was to be used "[a]s and for [c]hurch purposes only, … and in case the said premises shall be devoted to any other use than for [c]hurch purposes, … this conveyance shall be void and the parties of the first part shall have the right to re-enter and take possession of said premises …." A church was then built on the property. In 1937, the then-owner of the hotel company died with a will creating the private college and directing that all of the hotel company's assets be transferred to the college. The parties to the current dispute stipulated that the transfer included a deed transferring all reversionary rights and rights of entry held by the hotel company. In 2015, the Bishop of Ogdensburg relegated the church on the premises to "profane but not sordid use," and indicated that parishioners would be served by another church. The dioceses subsequently removed the altar and the stained glass windows. The private college then brought this action for a declaration that it now owned the church in fee simple absolute. Supreme Court disagreed and granted the diocese's summary judgment motion.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.