Real
Cases in Real Estate
is a weekly update on real estate law, with legal principles illustrated and
explained by lawsuits from around the country. The topics are wide-ranging for
appeal to a broad spectrum of readers including lawyers, homeowners, investors
and the general public. Andrea Lee Negroni, a Washington DC
attorney and legal writer with 25 years of experience in financial services and
mortgage law, contributes the case summaries.
Followers of
Real Cases in Real Estate will learn and be entertained by lawsuits
involving nuisance, trespass, zoning violations, deed restrictions, title
insurance, public utilities, mechanics liens, construction defects, adverse
possession, foreclosure and eviction, divorce and marital property rights,
tenants' rights, and more. Real Cases in Real Estate uncovers the
unpredictable, amusing, and sometimes outrageous disputes between next-door
neighbors, contractors and homeowners, condo boards and residents, real estate
brokers and homebuyers, and zoning administrators and developers.
Each fully
cited case summary highlights the essential law of the case and explains the
principal legal theories and concepts relevant to the outcome. Plain language
treatment makes Real Cases in Real Estate accessible to lawyers and
laymen alike.
Whether you
follow real estate law professionally or as a hobby, you'll find something new
and useful every week in Real Cases in Real Estate.
Updates
for the Week of April 27th, 2012
Viewing a neighboring
property with video cameras is not harassment in Minnesota; inconspicuously
installed video cameras do not have a substantial adverse effect on the
neighbors' privacy.
The Johnsons sought a restraining order against the Michels, claiming
harassment. Johnson noticed video cameras on the Michels' adjacent property;
the cameras were pointed toward his house. Michels installed the cameras for
security because there had been vandalism at his property. Johnson not only
called the sheriff's office to report Michels' cameras, but came onto Michels'
property and cut some of the camera wires.
At the hearing for the restraining order, the Johnsons said some of the
cameras pointed toward the bedroom and bathroom of their home, and the hot tub.
They said they felt "violated" by the video recording. The court dismissed the
Johnsons' petition, noting that what was recorded by the cameras was no
different than what could be seen by an observant neighbor. Moreover, the court
found no violation of the Johnsons' privacy because there were no intrusive or
unwanted acts, nor words or gestures that had an adverse effect on the
Johnsons' safety, privacy or security. Michels did not trespass on the
Johnsons' property or take any active measures towards them.
On appeal, the Johnsons argued that the court should have considered Minnesota criminal
statutes, making it a crime to stalk, follow, monitor or pursue another through
technological or other means. They also sought application of a Minnesota law making it
a gross misdemeanor to surreptitiously install or use a device for observing or
photographing a person through a window of a place where another person has an
expectation of privacy, with intent to interfere with that person's privacy.
Neither argument was persuasive because the cameras were not used
surreptitiously; they recorded only what an observant neighbor would have been
able to see. There was no evidence that Michel's camera used imaging techniques
that provided greater visual access than a still camera or the human eye. Michel's
cameras were small and installed in inconspicuous places, so they were not
instrusive acts with adverse effects on the Johnsons. The Johnsons did not get
the restraining order.
Johnson et al. vs. Michels Property Groups, LLC, et al.,
2010 Minn.
App. Unpub. LEXIS 959 (Sept. 14, 2010) [enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers].
....
Lexis.com subscribers can explore/search Real Estate Law resources on Lexis.com or access any of these Mathew Bender Real Estate Law publications:
Non-subscribers can purchase Property Law
treatises/resources and Mathew Bender publications from the LexisNexis Bookstore
Non-subscribers can purchase Real Estate Law
treatises/resources and Mathew Bender publications from the LexisNexis Bookstore
For more information about LexisNexis products and
solutions connect with us through our corporate
site.