blr202 week 8 test 2016 aug

QUESTION 1

Wk08.EVIDENCE ONLY 3MC. Joaquin installed new plumbing in Owen’s home. A few days later Owen noticed leaks and water damage on the walls. Owen said the leaks and damage were caused by Joaquin’s faulty work. Joaquin said he checked it after it was done and everything was done correctly, it must have been something else.

What evidence does Joaquin have the support his version of the facts?

a.

His testimony.

b.

Joaquin’s testimony.

c.

None

d.

Faulty work is a breach of the contract.

e.

Joaquin is liable for faulty workmanship.

1 points (Extra Credit) Saved

QUESTION 2

Wk08.Property. Easement.FIRST.

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

mc002-1.jpg

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip. (3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996). (5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

EASEMENT ARGUMENT QUESTION. Which of the following is the issue raised in the case?

a.

Did the trial court judge make an error?

b.

What does the law say or mean?

c.

What law applies?

d.

Did the jury make an error?

1 points Saved

QUESTION 3

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. What was the value issue before the trial court?

What was the decision of the trial court judge?

Is Killip entitled to an easement by prescription?

Did Killip use the land for 15 years as a driveway?

What is an easement by prescription?

1 points Saved

QUESTION 4

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. What was the legal issue before the trial court?

What is an easement by prescription?

What was the decision of the trial court judge?

Is Killip entitled to an easement by prescription?

Did Killip use the land for 15 years as a driveway?

1 points Saved

QUESTION 5

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. Another name for the judges’ conclusions to the legal issues raised is?

fact

rule

litigation

opinion

1 points (Extra Credit) Saved

QUESTION 6

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. Where is this case in the legal system? Another way of asking this is. What is the procedural posture of the case.

United States Supreme Court

trial court

appeal court

it is impossible to tell

1 points (Extra Credit) Saved

QUESTION 7

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. Sentence labeled (3) and beginning with “We do.” in the passage is ________________.

conclusion

fact

issue

rule

1 points Saved

QUESTION 8

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. Sentence labeled (4) with “An easement is a right.” is a _________.

rule

conclusion

issue

fact

1 points Saved

QUESTION 9

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. You might not be able to tell from the case citation, but it is filed in the Michigan state court system. If the parties wanted, could the U.S. Supreme Court hear this case?

No, this is a matter of state law and the US Supreme Court cannot make state law.

Yes, all cases involving land can be appealed to the US Supreme Court.

Yes, any case can be appealed to the US Supreme Court.

Yes because this case involves a US Constitutional law issue and therefore the US Supreme Court can hear it.

1 points Saved

QUESTION 10

Killip v. Mannisto , 624 N.W.2d 224, 244 Mich. App. 256, (Michigan state court) (2001) (Shortened, simplified, all internal cites omitted.)

This action arises out of a dispute over a strip of land situated between the lots of two neighbors. Plaintiff Killip has been using this strip of land since approximately 1975 as a portion of Killip’s driveway but is in fact titled in defendant Mannisto's name. Mannisto told Killip to tear up the portion of the driveway on Mannisto’s land and stop using it. Killip sued Mannisto and asked the lower court to determine Killip had an easement by prescription in the disputed strip. The trial court ruled in Killip’s favor saying an easement by prescription had arisen and Killip had the right to continue to use the area as a driveway.

(1) Defendant Mannisto appeals the trial court’s judgement to us. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

(2) Defendant Mannisto argues that the trial court erred in ruling that plaintiff Killip had acquired rights to use the triangular strip.

(3) We do not agree.

(4) An easement is a right to use the land of another for a specific purpose. Bowen & Buck v Fur Hunting Club, 217 Mich. App. 191 at 191-192; 550 N.W.2d 850 (1996).

(5) An easement by prescription arises from a use of [another’s land] that is open, notorious, adverse, and continuous for a period of fifteen years. Goodall v Whitefish Hunting Club, 208 Mich. App. 642, 645; 528 N.W.2d 221 (1995); Dyer v Thurston, 32 Mich. App. 341, 343; 188 N.W.2d 633 (1971). …”

(6) Because Killip used the strip of land for longer than fifteen years, he obtained an easement by prescription.

Wk08.Property. Easement. Same passage as above. This case was filed in the Michigan state court system. If a similar case arose in the Florida state court system but with different parties, would the Florida state court have to follow this case?

Yes, because this case involves a US Constitutional law issue.

Yes, all cases involving water are federal cases.

No, this is a matter of state law and each state makes its own state law.

No, because this case involves an issue of Washington state constitutional law.

1 points Saved

QUESTION 11

Wk08.Property.Odor #1. Ashley rented a house from Montoya in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Shortly after moving in she discovered numerous defects in the dwelling, the principle one was that within a few weeks, the toilet worked slowly possibly because of a leak in the plumbing someplace. The house contained a foul odor in some spots. She notified the landlord of the problems and he did attempt to fix the toilet however it is still broken. He told her the odor is not bad and she should be happy since the rent is very low. Ashley wonders if there is anything she can do legally about this problem.

mc011-1.jpg

What is the value issue raised?

a.

Has the owner violated the law of warranty of habitability?

b.

What law applies to landlords about maintaining rental property?

c.

Is the odor bad or not?

d.

Owners of residential real estate must keep the residence habitable and if not are liable for damages.

e.

Did Ashley rent a house from Montoya?

1 points Saved

QUESTION 12

Ashley rented a house from Montoya in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Shortly after moving in she discovered numerous defects in the dwelling, the principle one was that within a few weeks, the toilet worked slowly possibly because of a leak in the plumbing someplace. The house contained a foul odor in some spots. She notified the landlord of the problems and he did attempt to fix the toilet however it is still broken. He told her the odor is not bad and she should be happy since the rent is very low. Ashley wonders if there is anything she can do legally about this problem.

Wk08.Property.Odor. Same as above. What evidence below will help Ashley the most in proving her version of the facts?

The landlord’s testimony.

She can have a plumber look at the toilet, evaluate it, and testify.

Pictures

Her testimony.

1 points Saved

QUESTION 13

Ashley rented a house from Montoya in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Shortly after moving in she discovered numerous defects in the dwelling, the principle one was that within a few weeks, the toilet worked slowly possibly because of a leak in the plumbing someplace. The house contained a foul odor in some spots. She notified the landlord of the problems and he did attempt to fix the toilet however it is still broken. He told her the odor is not bad and she should be happy since the rent is very low. Ashley wonders if there is anything she can do legally about this problem.

Wk08.Property.Odor. Same as above. What law applies to this situation? Even if you do not know what law applies you should be able to pick out the correct answer from the choices below because only one of the statements below is a law, the others are conclusions or analysis.

Ashley should have checked out the residence more carefully before she rented it so she cannot recover.

The apartment is habitable.

The owner has not kept the apartment habitable.

Owners of residential real estate must keep the residence habitable and if not are liable for damages.

Ashley rented the residence not knowing about the problems.

1 points Saved

QUESTION 14

Ashley rented a house from Montoya in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Shortly after moving in she discovered numerous defects in the dwelling, the principle one was that within a few weeks, the toilet worked slowly possibly because of a leak in the plumbing someplace. The house contained a foul odor in some spots. She notified the landlord of the problems and he did attempt to fix the toilet however it is still broken. He told her the odor is not bad and she should be happy since the rent is very low. Ashley wonders if there is anything she can do legally about this problem.

Wk08.Property.Odor. Same as above. What is a factual issue raised?

Did Ashley rent a house from Montoya?

What law applies to landlords about maintaining rental property?

Owners of residential real estate must keep the residence habitable and if not are liable for damages.

Has the owner violated the law of warranty of habitability?

Is the odor bad or not?

1 points Saved

QUESTION 15

Ashley rented a house from Montoya in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Shortly after moving in she discovered numerous defects in the dwelling, the principle one was that within a few weeks, the toilet worked slowly possibly because of a leak in the plumbing someplace. The house contained a foul odor in some spots. She notified the landlord of the problems and he did attempt to fix the toilet however it is still broken. He told her the odor is not bad and she should be happy since the rent is very low. Ashley wonders if there is anything she can do legally about this problem.

Wk08.Property.Odor. Same as above. What is the legal issue raised?

Did Ashley rent a house from Montoya?

What law applies to landlords about maintaining rental property?

Has the owner violated the law of warranty of habitability?

Owners of residential real estate must keep the residence habitable and if not are liable for damages.

Is the odor bad or not?

1 points Saved

1 points

Question 16

According to the video clip, the original purpose of government was to protect protect [x] rights against aggression.

false

1 points

Question 17

Those who knowingly violate the Clean Air Act are exempt from criminal penalties.

True

False

1 points

Question 18

Marshall owns a piece of land, but James owns the mineral rights to Marshall's land. James wishes to sell the mineral rights. James

a.

can only sell the mineral rights if Marshall agrees.

b.

must give Marshall 30 percent of the proceeds of the sale of the mineral rights.

c.

cannot sell the mineral rights.

d.

can sell the mineral rights without consulting Marshall.

1 points

Question 19

Hi-Yield Agriculture, Inc., makes a pesticide with a one-in-a-million risk to people of developing cancer from exposure. This substance must be

a.

registered before it is sold.

b.

disposed of before anyone develops cancer.

c.

taken off the market and placed in temporary storage.

d.

used only in a way that avoids exposure to people.

1 points

Question 20

Jacob owns five acres of land in northern California. On his land Jacob has a house and a toolshed. There are ten large maple trees around the house that were there when Jacob bought the land. Since buying the land, Jacob has planted an apple tree. Jacob's real property includes

a.

the house, toolshed, maple tress and apple tree.

b.

the house and toolshed only.

c.

the house, toolshed and maple trees only.

d.

the house only.

1 points

Question 21

Sid rents an apartment from Town Properties, Inc. The lease, which ends on May 31, does not include an option for renewal, and Sid and Town do not discuss whether Sid can stay on at the end of the term. On June 1, Sid has

a.

an implied option to renew the term.

b.

a right to remain contingent on notice from Town.

c.

a right to remain subject to notice to Town.

d.

no right to remain.

1 points

Question 22

A special warranty deed provides the most protection against defects of title.

True

False

1 points

Question 23

The Environmental Protection Agency can regulate a toxic substance that poses an imminent hazard but cannot prohibit its use altogether.

True

False

1 points

Question 24

In a fee simple absolute, the owner has the greatest aggregation of rights, privileges, and power possible.

True

False

1 points

Question 25

Performance standards for major sources of air pollution require the use of the any available technology, or AAT.

True

False

1 points

Question 26

For a party to take by adverse possession, the party's possession must not be open or visible.

True

False

1 points

Question 27

A tenant is responsible for all damage to leased premises.

True

False

1 points

Question 28

The Environmental Protection lists all hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) on a prioritized schedule.

True

False

1 points

Question 29

There are no plans to develop national standards regulating the fuel economy and emissions for medium- and heavy-duty trucks.

True

False

1 points

Question 30

The Environmental Protection Agency has concluded that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide emissions, do not constitute a public danger.

True

False

1 points

Question 31

A license is the revocable right of a person to come onto another person's land.

True

False

1 points

Question 32

A recording statute allows deeds to be recorded to give notice to the public.

True

False

1 points

Question 33

Cow Country Corporation (CCC) sells half of its land to the Double R Ranch. On the land is a reservoir. In the deed, CCC retains the right to remove a limited amount of water per day from the reservoir. This right is

a.

a tenancy at sufferance.

b.

a profit.

c.

a license.

d.

an easement.

1 points

Question 34

Utility Power Company has the right to run its power lines across Velma's land. This is

a.

an easement.

b.

condemnation power.

c.

a license.

d.

a profit.

1 points

Question 35

The primary responsibility for preventing and controlling air pollution rests with the federal government.

True

False

1 points

Question 36

An easement arises when the owner of one piece of land occupies the real property of a neighbor and eventually acquires title to it.

True

False

1 points

Question 37

Tyro has the right to drive across Ula's land, which is next to Tyro's property, to reach an access road. Tyro's right is

a.

a profit.

b.

a tenancy at will.

c.

an easement.

d.

a license.

1 points

Question 38

Dora leases a house from Evan for a two-year term. To ensure the validity of their lease, it should include

a.

a description of the property.

b.

a requirement that Dora perform structural repairs to the house.

c.

a requirement that Evan carry liability insurance.

d.

a due date for the payment of the property taxes.

1 points

Question 39

Metal Smelting, Inc., operates a plant¾a "major source"¾that emits hazardous air pollutants for which the Environmental Protection Agency has set maximum levels of emission. The plant does not use any equipment to reduce its emissions. Under the Clean Air Act, this is most likely

a.

not a violation because a "major source" is exempt.

b.

not a violation because the plant is not a mobile source.

c.

not a violation because the plant does not use any equipment.

d.

a violation.

1 points

Question 40

Jack owns the surface rights for Rocky Ridge Ranch, but does not own the subsurface rights. Ginny owns the subsurface rights. Rocky Ridge Ranch has a historic barn, which is damaged when Ginny is excavating minerals from the ranch. Who is most likely responsible for the damage to the barn?

a.

no one

b.

Ginny only

c.

Ginny and Jack

d.

Jack only

1 points

Question 41

Rural Electric Company submits a bid to build a dam on federal land as part of a federal project. For this action, an environmental impact statement is most likely

a.

prohibited.

b.

required.

c.

unnecessary.

d.

voluntary.

1 points

Question 42

A tenant has a duty to maintain in a reasonably safe condition those areas under his or her control.

True

False

1 points

Question 43

Without a permit, Timberline Plywood Company discharges its untreated wastewater into Urban City's storm drainage pipes, which empty into Valley Creek. Under the Clean Water Act, this discharge is most likely

a.

a violation.

b.

not a violation because the company does not have a permit.

c.

not a violation because a storm drainage pipe is not a point source.

d.

not a violation because water is not a stationary source.

1 points

Click Save and Submit to save and submit. Click Save All Answers to save all answers.s