72. According to their deeds, Baker and Larson share a common driveway on a boundary line between their two properties. Does the right of use for the driveway continue for both properties after Baker's death?
Answer: A
Yes, it continues regardless of any change in ownership.
The right of use for the driveway persists for both properties even after Baker's death, indicating that ownership changes do not affect this shared arrangement.
A) Yes, it continues regardless of any change in ownership.
This option is correct because shared driveways typically grant an easement that is not contingent upon the owner's life. As long as the easement was established legally, it remains in effect for the benefit of both properties, ensuring continued access regardless of ownership changes.
B) Yes, it is an easement in gross which is always transferable.
While this option suggests that the easement is transferable, it incorrectly categorizes the nature of the driveway's easement. An easement in gross typically does not tie to the land but rather to an individual or entity. However, the right of use in this case continues irrespective of individual ownership, making this option misleading.
C) No, it is an encroachment that does not transfer.
This option is incorrect because characterizing the driveway as an encroachment misrepresents the nature of the shared use. An encroachment implies a violation of property lines, while here, the driveway serves as a legal easement benefiting both properties, which does transfer upon ownership changes.
D) No, it terminates upon Baker's death.
This option is incorrect as it contradicts the principle of easements. The right to use the driveway does not terminate with Baker’s death; instead, it continues to exist for the benefit of both properties, ensuring access and use remains intact.
Conclusion
The correct answer is A, as it affirms that the shared right of use for the driveway remains unaffected by Baker's death. All other options either misinterpret the nature of the easement or incorrectly assert that the right of use ceases, which does not align with property law principles regarding easements.