Also known as: wastes · wasted · wasting · wastor · waster
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An unreasonable act or omission by a person holding a limited estate in land that substantially impairs the value of the land for the holder of a future interest. The doctrine imposes a duty on life tenants and similar holders to avoid permanent damage or depletion beyond ordinary use.
An unreasonable act or omission by a person holding a limited estate in land that substantially impairs the value of the land for the holder of a future interest. The doctrine imposes a duty on life tenants and similar holders to avoid permanent damage or depletion beyond ordinary use.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The misapplication or dissipation of corporate assets by directors or controlling persons without a rational business purpose. Such conduct supplies a statutory ground for judicial dissolution of the corporation.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The misapplication or dissipation of corporate assets by directors or controlling persons without a rational business purpose. Such conduct supplies a statutory ground for judicial dissolution of the corporation.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Wyatt Wilson operates a disposal company that hauls hazardous materials from State B into State A. State A charges his firm a $50-per-ton surcharge on out-of-state waste while in-state generators pay only $10 per ton. Wilson sues, claiming the differential violates the Dormant Commerce Clause because it discriminates against interstate movement of the material.
Willow Walker offers twelve nearly identical photographs of a damaged building to prove the extent of harm in her nuisance suit. The court excludes nine of them under Rule 403, finding that the additional images add little probative value yet would waste time and risk confusing the jury about the single issue of causation.
Winston West holds a life estate in Blackacre, a wooded parcel. Without consent of the remainderman, he clear-cuts the merchantable timber and sells it. The remainderman sues, claiming the cutting exceeds the privileges of a life tenant and constitutes waste that permanently reduces the land's value.
Wanda Weaver owns a private recycling plant outside the municipality. A city ordinance requires all locally generated solid waste to be processed at the city's own facility before export. Weaver challenges the rule as an unconstitutional barrier that discriminates against out-of-state processors of the material.
During trial, counsel for Wrightway Engineering begins repetitive questioning of a witness on matters already covered. The court invokes Rule 611 to curtail the examination, stating that further inquiry would waste time without advancing the search for truth or testing credibility.
Property waste requires an unreasonable impairment of land value by a limited-estate holder such as a life tenant. Corporate waste requires dissipation of company assets without rational business purpose by directors or controllers. Both supply independent grounds for relief, but the protected interest differs: future interest holders in land versus the corporation and its shareholders.
No. Ordinary depreciation from normal use does not constitute waste. Waste requires affirmative damage or neglect that substantially and permanently reduces the land's value to the remainderman beyond what a fee simple owner could lawfully do.
Supporting sources
A mortgagee may recover damages, obtain an injunction, or foreclose when the mortgagor damages the security or fails to make reasonable repairs, provided the impairment of security meets the ratio test in the Restatement. Third-party waste does not trigger foreclosure against the mortgagor.
Whitney Washington and Wesley Wong each own half of Horizon Films. Wong directs most available cash to a film starring his relatives while rejecting commercially superior offers. Washington petitions for dissolution, alleging that the allocation constitutes waste of corporate assets under the statute.
Shareholder approval shifts the burden to the challenger to prove waste but does not automatically validate a transaction that no reasonable person would approve. Courts still examine whether the deal can be attributed to any rational business purpose.
Supporting sources
…Dozens in Canada Follow Gay Couple's Lead, Washington Post, June 12, 2003, p. A25. At the end of its opinion—after having laid waste the foundations of our rational-basis jurisprudence—the Court says that the present case "does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that…