Also known as: runs with the land · running with the land · ran with the land · covenant running with the land
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A covenant or promise respecting the use of land that passes automatically to successors in interest. The benefit or burden travels with the estate when the original parties intended it to do so and the successor acquires an interest in the land to which the promise relates.
Rowan Russell conveyed land to Renata Russo by general warranty deed containing covenants of title. Renata later conveyed the same parcel to Ruby Rivera. When a title defect surfaced, Ruby sued Rowan directly on the warranty. The covenant supported the claim because it had passed with each successive transfer of the estate.
Roberto Reyes promised Raphael Rivera that he would keep a shared driveway clear for access to the adjoining parcel. The deed recited that the promise was made for the benefit of the dominant land. When Raphael sold the dominant parcel to Ralph Richardson, Ralph enforced the promise against Roberto. The parties' recorded intent allowed the benefit to travel with the estate.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Reliance Insurance obtained a promise from a neighboring owner to maintain a boundary fence. Reliance later sold its parcel to Riverside Healthcare. Riverside sought to enforce the fence obligation. Because Riverside had succeeded to Reliance's interest in the land that the promise concerned, the benefit reached the new owner.
A surface owner acquired land subject to an old waiver allowing underground mining without liability for subsidence. The waiver had been given decades earlier by a prior surface owner. When the current owner sued to block mining that would damage the surface, the court considered whether the waiver bound successors. The analysis turned on whether the original covenant had passed with the surface estate.
A purchaser bought a garden square with actual knowledge that the prior owner had covenanted to keep it open for the benefit of surrounding houses. The buyer planned to build on the square. Adjoining owners sued in equity to stop the construction. The court enforced the restriction against the buyer because the covenant had passed with the land and the buyer took with notice.
A testator's will directed that her residence be razed after her death and the lot left vacant. The executor sought to sell the lot to a buyer who intended to build. Neighbors holding lots in the same subdivision claimed the direction created a running restriction. The court examined whether the restriction could bind successors to the estate and whether it violated public policy.
The original parties must have intended the benefit to pass to successors. The promise must also relate to the use of the land, and the successor must acquire an interest in that land.
Supporting sources
Future covenants in a warranty deed run with the land and may be enforced by remote grantees against prior warrantors. Present covenants generally do not run in the same way and are enforceable only by the immediate grantee.
Supporting sources
A nonassuming transferee is not personally liable on the note or mortgage. Mortgage covenants that affect use or maintenance may still run with the land and bind the transferee to the extent they fall within the law of waste.
Supporting sources
The benefit still passes with the land if the original parties intended it to run. No separate assignment is required when the covenant touches and concerns the estate and the successor acquires the relevant interest.
Supporting sources
…with buildings. On a motion to discharge that order, Mr. R. Palmer for the defendant contended that the covenant did not run with the land so as to be binding at law upon a purchaser from the covenantor, and he relied on the dictum of Lord Brougham C. in Keppell v. Bayley (2 M. & K. 547) to the effect that notice of such a…