Real Estate & Property Law

Reverter Clauses

By Alan Ackerman

Fosters.com

PORTSMOUTH — Residents concerned with how the city plans to allocate the money needed to lift deed restrictions from Alumni Field provided an earful of input to the city legal department Tuesday night.

The purpose of the public hearing was to obtain comment regarding the disposition of the $590,000 in damages arising from the eminent domain proceeding to remove deed restrictions from the Parrot Avenue property, also known as the Peirce Property.

The property was acquired by the city by deed from Joshua W. Peirce, on Nov. 14, 1913, and is subject to a number of restrictions, most notably "that the land herein conveyed shall be held and improved by the City of Portsmouth forever as a park and for no other purpose."

After a public hearing in October 2008, the City Council affirmed the public's need to remove the restrictions to renovate the Portsmouth Middle School because it was believed the field limited the use of the property.

    Buckingham County, City of Portsmouth has the same difficult analysis as so many other communities do throughout the country.  Quite simply, gifts are made of property which, over the years, would not have been made or would have been made differently but for the fact the community wanted the donation.  There are statutes in some jurisdictions which limit the reverter or the reversionary interest after a period of years, and most states limit which type of clause is used.  
    The problem with these donations is they truly are restraints on the alienation of property, something that has been opposed throughout our constitutional history.

Full post as published by National Eminent Domain Blog on December 02, 2009 (boomark / email).