benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 1523 / In 1996, a developer purchased a 100-acre tract located in a northern county in…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

In 1996, a developer purchased a 100-acre tract located in a northern county in a state. Shortly thereafter, the developer prepared a subdivision plan that created 100 one-acre residential building lots on this tract. In 1997, the subdivision plan was recorded with the county recorder's office. During the next few years, the developer sold 60 residential lots to individual purchasers. Each deed specified that every lot designated on the subdivision plan was to be recorded in the county recorder's office. Each deed also provided the following:"No house trailer or mobile home shall be built or maintained on any lot within the subdivision. "In 2003, the developer conveyed the remaining 40 lots to a builder by deed that included language identical to that contained in the first 60 deeds. This deed from the developer to the builder was recorded. By 2008, the builder had sold all of the 40 lots. Each of these deeds identified each lot as being a part of the subdivision, but did not include the clause relating to mobile homes. On January 30, 2009, a buyer, who had purchased one of the residential lots from the builder, placed a mobile home on his property. Which of the following statements is LEAST accurate with respect to the buyer's deed?

category

law

options

  1. The buyer has no obligation to remove the mobile home.
  2. All subsequent grantees of the builder would be in privity of contract.
  3. The deed from the builder to the buyer did not include the covenant prohibiting mobile homes.
  4. The covenant prohibiting mobile homes ran with the land as far as the builder, but not as far as the buyer.
  5. All subsequent grantees of the builder would be in privity of estate.
  6. The buyer should have had constructive notice of the restriction against mobile homes.
  7. The buyer should have had actual notice of the restriction against mobile homes.
  8. The covenant prohibiting mobile homes could be enforced by any subdivision lot owner.
  9. The covenant prohibiting mobile homes was not recorded with the county recorder's office.
  10. The covenant prohibiting mobile homes could only be enforced by the original developer.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
1523
task_id
eb4f6c7e-7c28-5e93-a7f6-6bc9a676460d
task_key
default--test--1523
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import