Also known as: entitle to enforce the instrument · entitles to enforce the instrument · person entitled to enforce
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A party possessing the legal right to compel performance or payment of an obligation evidenced by a negotiable instrument or express promise. The right arises from possession of the instrument under applicable rules or from privity created by a transfer that meets specified conditions. Relief from the obligation requires an affirmative act by this party.
Evelyn Ellison leased property to Emanuel Escobar under a lease containing an express maintenance covenant. Escobar assigned the lease to Eric Espinoza without any release language. Evelyn later sued Escobar for breach after the assignee failed to perform. The court held that Evelyn remained the party entitled to enforce the promise against Escobar because no relief had been granted.
Emmett Egan held an easement across Esme Ellington's land. Eduardo Enriquez used the burdened parcel in a manner inconsistent with the easement for the full prescriptive period without objection from Emmett. The court ruled that Emmett's interest as the party entitled to enforce the servitude was extinguished by prescription.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Elysium Media originated a loan secured by a mortgage and later sold the note to Echelon Security. Echo Systems received only an assignment of the mortgage without the note. After default, Echelon alone commenced foreclosure. The court determined that Echelon was the party entitled to enforce the instrument and therefore the only entity with standing to foreclose.
Emerald Enterprises leased space to a tenant under a lease with an express covenant to maintain signage. The tenant assigned the lease to a new occupant. The assignee took possession and the landlord sought performance of the covenant. The court held that the landlord remained the party entitled to enforce the covenant against the assignee because the promise touched and concerned the land and privity of estate was created by the transfer.
Only the party entitled to enforce the note may foreclose. Transfer of the note carries the mortgage with it unless the parties agree otherwise. A separate assignment of the mortgage alone without the note creates no enforcement right.
An original tenant remains liable on an express promise if the obligation rests on privity of contract and the landlord has not relieved the tenant. Consent to the assignment alone does not constitute relief. The landlord may therefore enforce against the original tenant even after the transfer.
A transferee becomes obligated when the promise touches and concerns the land, the parties intended the burden to run, the transferee is not relieved by the enforcing party, and the transfer creates privity of estate. The transferee incurs no liability for breaches occurring before the transfer.
Yes. Adverse use maintained against the party entitled to enforce the servitude for the prescriptive period modifies or extinguishes that party's interest. Each continuing interference starts a new limitations period.