Tag: Law School

Party Walls

In England a long time ago someone important decided that the buildings should be made of brick and mortar instead of wood. In order to support the increased weight of the upper floors, wider walls were needed. To avoid significant loss of square footage on the lower lever because of thicker walls, “party walls” shared by neighbors were erected. Each neighbor had a duty to maintain the wall and to refrain from damaging the integrity of the “party wall.”

New England’s adoption of the “party walls” approach to fences and other such developments between property owners was the inspiration for Robert Frost’s poem, “Mending Wall,” which ends with, “Good fences make good neighbors.” (link)

Applying for a Mortgage

Interesting tidbit from Property Law, which may be obvious to home-owners. (I don’t own a home.)

Often we hear people say they have a mortgage, or they’re going to get a mortgage. But, they actually give a mortgage as collateral to get a loan.

Definition:

A charging of real property by a debtor to a creditor as a security for a debt (esp. one incurred by the purchase of property), on the condition that it shall be returned on payment of the debt within a certain period.

I just saw in the news that mortgage applications have fallen for the fifth week in a row.

Content-Neutral Ban on Billboards

Sao Paulo recently banned all billboards from its city limits. (Pictures with billboards)(Pictures without billboards) Although the city is in Brazil and not the United States, it highlights an interesting point in my Constitutional Law reading. A “state” may place a content-neutral ban on an entire medium if:

1. The state interests are sufficiently significant,
2. The interests do not suppress the freedom of expression,
3. The law is narrowly tailored, and
4. There are viable alternatives available.

The United States Supreme Court has stated:

A majority of this Court found [in Metromedia] that [aesthetic] considerations would be sufficient to justify a content-neutral ban on all outdoor advertising signs, notwithstanding the extent to which such signs convey First Amendment protected messages. Lakewood v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co., 486 U.S. 750, 783 (1988) (White, J., dissenting)(citing the plurality opinion and the dissenting opinions of Burger, C.J. and Rehnquist and Stevens, JJ.)

In Sao Paulo’s case, they are seeking to clean up the aesthetics of the city and are not targeting a specific type of billboard ad, but all billboard ads. The fact that an entire medium of communication is being banned could be seen as a content-based interest, however there are likely equally viable options to advertise other than billboards.

Indentured Deed

Here is an interesting excerpt from my property text book that reminded me of those heart shaped best-friends-forever necklaces that split into two pieces.

In the days before typewriters and carbon paper, and centuries before Xerox, lawyers were faced with the problem of providing duplicate copies of deeds in certain instances when both the grantor and grantee wanted a copy (for example, in case of a mortgage). They found the solution in an indenture. The deed was written out twice on a single sheet of parchment (usually made from sheepskin stretched, scraped, and scoured) and signed at the end of each copy by both grantor and grantee. The parchment was then cut into two pieces in an irregular line, leaving a sawtooth or indented edge. The two halves, forming two separate deeds, one for the grantor and one for the grantee, could be fitted together to show their genuineness.

My Oral Argument

I have to present an oral argument in a week for a mock moot court case we’re doing in Legal Skills. It involves a police officer who, while off-duty, beat a man. There are two issues that I must argue. First, whether the court of appeals has jurisdiction to hear the plaintiff’s appeal. Second, whether the officer acted under the color of law. I represent the defendant (police officer) and kind of have my back up against the wall.

I did a practice oral argument for Legal Skills today. It went OK, but I was nervous and it showed. Apparently, I said, “um,” 51 times in ten minutes. Someone was actually counting. I was advised to reference my case law before the judges do; this will put me on the offensive as opposed to the defensive because I will be able to highlight the stronger analogies. I also need to be less monotone and more detailed, however my pacing was good and I was direct and clear.

The final question asked of me was, “How do you arrest an unconscious man?” To which I replied, “I would like to conclude my argument here…” I had no answer… I froze… but, now that I’m home I know how to answer it. So, I guess that’s one roadblock I know how to avoid when the real argument comes up.