Also known as: privileges to use
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An authorization conferred by law or governing documents to make a specified use of land, facilities, or defensive force, subject to the limitations and duties stated in the governing rule or instrument.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Paul Peterson holds a fee simple conditional in rural land with no children yet born. He contracts to demolish the existing clinic and build a multi-story medical center. The court evaluates whether the complete removal of the original structure before issue arrives violates the duty that limits his authorization to use the property.
Pierce Patterson faces an attacker who threatens serious injury. He responds with force that a reasonable person would view as likely to cause only minor harm. The analysis turns on whether the chosen means stays within the bounds of the authorization to defend against the threatened contact.
Priya Prasad owns a unit in a common-interest community. The association adopts rules imposing fines and withdrawing access to the pool after repeated violations of parking regulations. The validity of the withdrawal depends on whether the governing documents authorize the association to limit use privileges as an enforcement tool.
Phuong Pham holds an estate in fee tail preserved for a single lifetime. She leases the building to a law firm and plans to remove interior walls and add a rooftop addition. The dispute centers on whether these alterations stay within the authorization to use the property or cross into prohibited waste.
Pedro Pacheco operates an email service targeted by repeated unsolicited messages from a marketing firm. He deploys filters that block the incoming traffic. The question is whether the filters constitute reasonable steps to protect the system under the authorization to defend against interference with the chattel.
Pamela Phillips runs an online marketplace whose servers are accessed by an automated bot that copies listing data thousands of times per day. She implements rate limits to reduce the load. The case examines whether the limits fall within the authorization to protect the possessory interest in the computer system from substantial interference.
The authorization matches that of a fee simple absolute owner except that it is limited by the duty not to commit waste prior to the birth of issue. Complete demolition that permanently alters the land's character and removes all traces of the original improvement triggers the waste limitation. Courts therefore enjoin the project when the contingent future interest would be impaired by the irreversible change.
The holder enjoys the same broad authority to use the land as a fee simple absolute owner. That authority is expressly limited by the duty not to commit waste. Removing durable fixtures and replacing them with less durable materials that reduce long-term value constitutes waste that exceeds the privilege.
…Clause (c). Sufficient legal protection of the possessor's interest in the mere inviolability of his chattel is afforded by his privilege to use reasonable force to protect his possession against even harmless interference. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 218, Comment e (emphasis added). Plaintiff CompuServe has attempted to…
…affected.... Sufficient legal protection of the possessor’s interest in the mere inviolability of his chattel is afforded by his privilege to use
…construction of a writing (NRS 30.040) and determination of issues of fact (NRS 30.110). Matters respecting the extent of the privilege to use
…begin by reviewing the applicable legal principles. Easements are not ownership interests in the servient tract but "the privilege to use
The association possesses the power to enforce governing documents and rules through reasonable procedures that include withdrawal of privileges to use common facilities. Such measures must be adopted pursuant to the governing documents and must be reasonable in scope. Withdrawal is therefore permissible when it deters violations without exceeding the authority granted by the declaration.
The privilege permits reasonable force that is neither intended nor likely to cause death or serious bodily harm. Serious bodily harm is defined as injury whose consequences differ in kind from ordinary harm, including substantial risk of death, mayhem, or permanent loss of function of an important organ. Force that unexpectedly causes such harm remains privileged if the actor neither intended nor reasonably anticipated that result.