All Neighbors Can Enforce
This trap appears as a wrong-answer choice in 1 active question. Spotting how it is built is the repair: read each example's “why it's attractive” before the “why it's wrong.”
Subject distribution
- Real Property1
Example wrong choices
15022_psalm_lane_covenant · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice AInjunction should be denied, but damages should be awarded to all plaintiffs, measured by any diminution in market value caused by Timothy's two-family residence.
Why it's attractive
The choice talks about damages for all plaintiffs and denies injunction, but the decisive map is who has the covenant benefit.
Why it's wrong
The choice talks about damages for all plaintiffs and denies injunction, but the decisive map is who has the covenant benefit.
15022_psalm_lane_covenant · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice BAll plaintiffs should be awarded an injunction because the parcels were subject to a common residential development scheme, but damages should be denied to all.
Why it's attractive
The phrase common development scheme does not match the deed pattern: Parcels A, C, and E were sold without restrictions.
Why it's wrong
The phrase common development scheme does not match the deed pattern: Parcels A, C, and E were sold without restrictions.
15022_psalm_lane_covenant · REAL_PROPERTY · Choice CAll plaintiffs should be denied any recovery or relief because the zoning ordinance allows two-family residences and therefore preempts any private scheme of restrictive covenants.
Why it's attractive
The choice makes public zoning erase private covenants. The taught Gold Key says zoning permission does not wipe out a stricter private restriction.
Why it's wrong
The choice makes public zoning erase private covenants. The taught Gold Key says zoning permission does not wipe out a stricter private restriction.
Practice the questions that use this trap as a distractor and get full Wrong Answer Forensics on submit.
Practice questions using this trap →