September 2016 LACBA MCLE Test and Answer Sheet

Test No. 260: A Right to a View

To access the article related to this test, please click here.
Instructions for Obtaining MCLE Credit

The Los Angeles County Bar Association certifies that this activity has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1 hour. To apply for credit, please follow the instructions.

1. Study the CLE article.

2. Answer the test questions by marking the appropriate boxes. Each question has only one answer.

3. Photocopies of this answer sheet may be submitted; however, this form should not be enlarged or reduced. Mail the answer sheet and the $20 testing fee ($25 for non-LACBA members) to:

Los Angeles Lawyer
P.O. Box 55020
Los Angeles, CA 90055

Make checks payable to Los Angeles Lawyer.

4. You can also fill in the test form and submit it directly to LACBA by clicking "Submit." To submit your test answers online you will need to pay by credit card. After submitting your answers you will be presented with a screen requesting payment information. This information will be submitted in a secure mode which will allow you to safely transmit your credit card number over the Internet. If you prefer not to pay by credit card, please print this answer sheet and submit your responses by regular mail.

5. Within six weeks, Los Angeles Lawyer will return your test with the correct answers, a rationale for the correct answers, and a certificate verifying the CLE credit you earned through this self-assessment activity.

6. For future reference, please retain the CLE test materials returned to you.


Test Sheet

Mark your answers to the test by clicking next to your choice.  All questions must be answered.  Each question has only one answer. This test is worth 1 hour of credit.*

1. Two methods of enforcing land use restrictions contained in a recorded declaration of restrictions are as covenants that run with the land or as equitable servitudes.

2. Only covenants specified by statute run with the land.

3. Under Civil Code Section 1462, a covenant that benefits or burdens the property may run with the land.

4. Civil Code Section 1468 was amended in 1968 to include covenants between a grantor and grantee and can be applied retroactively.

5. Whether or not a declaration of restrictions is recorded before the first deed out from the subdivider, lots in the subdivision will only be governed by the restrictions if each deed expressly referenced the recorded Declaration.

6. The determination of whether a restriction is a personal power or runs with the land is factual and rests upon intent, notice, and other equitable factors.

7. A restrictive covenant is not enforceable against a subsequent grantee unless the grantee had notice of the restriction at the time title to the property was received.

8. A recorded restriction constitutes constructive notice, which has the same effect as actual notice.

9. A homeowner may rely on the title report received from the insurance company as the accurate status of title.

10. A cause of action for violation of a restrictive covenant must be filed within four years from the time the person seeking to enforce the restriction discovered, or through the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the violation.

11. For purposes of determining when the statute of limitations begins, what a plaintiff knows, or reasonably should know, is a question of fact.

12. A laches defense requires a showing that the delay in asserting the right to enforce the restriction was unreasonable such that enforcement of the restriction now would cause material prejudice to the party against whom enforcement is sought.

13. The laches defense may be applicable even when the party seeking enforcement has notified the violating party of the violation yet the party continues to violate the restrictions.

14. For a demurrer to be sustained on the grounds of laches, both the delay and injury must be disclosed in the complaint.

15. Estoppel may apply when the offending party detrimentally relies on the actions of the party seeking to enforce the restriction.

16. Under the doctrine of changed circumstances, a restriction may become unenforceable when the original purpose of the restriction has become obsolete and continued enforcement would be oppressive and inequitable.

17. The defense of changed circumstances does not apply so long as the original purpose of the restriction can still be realized, even if the unrestricted use of the property would be more profitable to its owner.

18. Courts may enforce equitable servitudes even if they are determined to be unfair or inequitable.

19. Reasonable height and view restrictions are enforceable.

20. To create a uniform general plan, as long as the general plan or scheme applies to all of the parcels in the tract, specific restrictions may apply differently to separate parcels within the tract.


Before clicking the Submit button, please verify that all questions have been answered. An error message will appear if not all questions are answered.

* The Los Angeles County Bar Association has been approved as a continuing legal education provider of Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California. This self-assessment activity will qualify for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of one hour.