Also known as: melioration · meliorate · meliorated · meliorating · improvements · betterments · ameliorations
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
Additions or enhancements made to real or personal property that increase its value or utility. Such changes are considered when allocating risk of loss, measuring damages in conversion, or determining duties to repair under servitudes and leases.
Maya Malik contracted to buy a warehouse from Maurice Marshall. Before closing a fire destroyed new loading docks Maya had planned as meliorations. Under the majority rule the risk had already shifted to Maya at contract formation so she remained obligated to pay the full price.
Michelle Murphy borrowed from Morgan Financial to buy vacant land and immediately build a retail store. The loan documents described the funds as financing both acquisition and the meliorations. The mortgage therefore qualified as a purchase-money mortgage with priority over earlier liens.
Megan Moore wrongfully took a delivery van from Meridian Motors and installed a custom refrigeration unit. When Meridian sued for conversion the court added the measurable increase in the van's value attributable to the meliorations when calculating damages.
Melissa Mills held an access easement across Miguel Mendoza's parcel that included a paved driveway. Joint use required both parties to share the cost of repairing potholes and resurfacing because the meliorations served the easement.
Mosaic Retail leased a storefront and promised to maintain the premises in good condition. A fire destroyed interior fixtures that constituted meliorations. The lease contained no express rebuilding obligation so Mosaic was not required to restore the improvements.
Magnolia Foods owned a processing plant the city condemned for redevelopment. The taking encompassed both the original building and later meliorations such as expanded cold-storage units that had increased the property's fair market value.
In the late 1990s the city of New London, Connecticut, confronted severe economic decline after the 1996 closure of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, which had employed more than 1,500 people. The city's unemployment rate stood nearly double the state average and its population had dropped below 24,000 residents from a 1970 high of 30,000. State and local officials therefore designated the Fort Trumbull peninsula for targeted economic revitalization. In 1998 the New London Development Corporation, a private nonprofit entity, was reactivated to prepare a redevelopment plan covering roughly 90 acres. The plan divided the area into seven parcels designated for a waterfront conference hotel and marinas, retail and entertainment space, research and office facilities, parking and park support, residential units, a Coast Guard museum, and additional office and retail uses. The city council formally approved the plan in January 2000 and authorized the NLDC to acquire needed parcels by purchase or, if necessary, by eminent domain. Petitioners Susette Kelo, Wilhelmina Dery, and seven other owners held fifteen properties within parcels 3 and 4A; ten of those parcels were occupied by the owners or their family members and none was alleged to be blighted. After negotiations with the NLDC failed, the corporation initiated condemnation proceedings against the remaining properties in November 2000. In December 2000 the petitioners filed suit in New London Superior Court asserting that the proposed takings violated the public-use limitation of the Fifth Amendment. Following a seven-day bench trial the Superior Court entered a permanent restraining order barring condemnation of the parcel 4A properties but denied relief as to the parcel 3 properties. Both sides appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court, which upheld the validity of all challenged takings. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the federal constitutional question.
View caseUnder the majority rule risk of loss for meliorations passes to the buyer at contract formation. The buyer therefore bears the loss if improvements are destroyed even though legal title remains with the seller.
A mortgage qualifies when loan proceeds are used to construct improvements on the real estate and the mortgage is given in the same transaction as title acquisition. The mortgage then receives priority over earlier claims.
When a converter not in good faith adds meliorations the owner may recover the additional value those improvements contributed to the chattel. The measure prevents the converter from retaining the benefit of unauthorized enhancements.
The easement beneficiary must repair and maintain portions of the servient estate and improvements under its control. Joint use of the same improvements creates a duty to contribute proportionally to reasonable repair costs.
A covenant to maintain premises and surrender them in good condition does not obligate the tenant to rebuild improvements destroyed by fire or casualty unless the lease expressly requires rebuilding after such events.