Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)

Citation
Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)
Parent Document
Moorcroft v. Severance (2018)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
2018-03-12

Other Sections in This Document (73)

Full Text

3,575 chars
3
        b. The Severances were credited for $20,000 they had paid Mr. Moorcroft, and for the
            remaining $40,000 in advance lease payments they were to provide a $40,000
            Promissory Note to Shirley and Arthur. (Page 1, Para. 5 and 6). The Parties’
            Agreement said that “[a]ny breach of said Promissory Note shall not be a breach of
            the Lease.” (Id).
        c. Mr. Moorcroft got exclusive use of the original residence on the premises and the
            Severances got exclusive use of any residences they might construct or place on the
            property (Page 1, Para. 7). As to the open land on the property, Jim had co-extensive
            (per capita or person) co-tenant use rights with the Severances as if Jim owned an
            equal co-tenant in common share to the land with them. (Id)
        d. Mr. Moorcroft and the Severances each paid taxes assessed against their residences.
            For the common land the Severances paid in proportion – one share per each person.
            (One fifth each while all four Severances were alive; one fourth each after Rose
            Severance died). (Page 1, last Paragraph). Jim would be included in this co-tenant
            count and had to pay his share as if he were a co-tenant. (Id, stating Jim as Landlord
            and the Severances, as surviving Tenants, paid such taxes “in equal fraction”)
        e. Jim, agreed to not mortgage or encumber his interest in the Subject Property, without
            the Severances’ written consent. (Page 2, last sentence)
        f. The Lease had a section that described the overarching intent that the instrument was
            meant to give the Severances a life lease and to provide them a place to establish their
            homes, and to farm and work, and for Jim to continue to have his home on the
            property, and to in essence have the parties act “as if they were equal co-tenants”
            while the Severances were alive, except as to special provisions as to their residences.
            (Page 2, last paragraph)
    26. After the Life Lease was signed, the Severances made some improvements as the Life
        Lease allowed and placed some trailers on the land. The trailers3 were placed across the
        river from the farmhouse, on the Subject Property. The pre-trailer improvements, mostly
        paid for by the Severances, included improving a road, replacing a bridge, constructing
        wells and septic fields and electric supply lines.
    27. At first two trailers were placed – one for John and his mother (Rose) and another for
        Steve and his wife, Barb. Steve and Barb continue to reside on the Subject Property in
        their mobile home. As described below, John came to move into Jim’s farmhouse, after
        Rose died and during a brief period when John co-occupied his trailer with Jim. After
        vacating his trailer, John rented it out to relatives.
    28. Later John placed a third trailer on the property, which has been rented out to other
        relatives.
    29. Jim agreed that he received the $20,000 from the Severance called for in the Life Lease.
    30. The $40,000 Promissory Note from the four Severances to Shirley and Arthur was
        prepared and signed by the Severances, and provided to Jim. (Tr. Ex. D). It appears that
        Shirley either never saw it or by 2018 forgot it had ever been discussed in her presence.
        The court finds, from the evidence presented, that Shirley (or Arthur) in fact knew of the