Real Estate Law

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiffs-landowners’ action seeking to quiet title on 1952 easement given to defendants to construct second underground pipeline across plaintiffs’ property. Instant easement granted defendants right to build second pipeline within 10 feet of first pipeline, and Ct. rejected plaintiff’s claims that said right had expired or that Rule Against Perpetuities applied to instant easement. Ct also rejected as speculative plaintiffs’ claim that proposed pipeline would be incompatible with existing surface farming.

Record contained sufficient evidence to support jury’s verdict in favor of defendant in action under Ill. Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, where plaintiff-owner of condominium units alleged that defendants-sellers of said units improperly used “bait and switch” tactic to convince plaintiff to purchase said units by promising plaintiff certain access to hotel facilities in condominium building and then subsequently taking away plaintiff’s use of said facilities pursuant to “change clause” contained in purchase agreement and other condominium documents. Defendant presented plausible evidence explaining that instant change was based on defendant’s hiring of new employee, who believed that plaintiff and others might mismanage said hotel facilities. Moreover, plaintiff could not establish viable breach of contract action where applicable terms of purchasing agreement allowed defendant make instant change, and where any implied duty of good faith could not modify express terms of agreement. Also, plaintiff could not establish viable claim under Ill. Securities Law, where instant agreement involving purchase of condominium did not constitute “investment contract”/security under Ill. law.