Real Property Law

In an action by life tenant and two remaindermen seeking authorization to sell the development rights to a farm, plaintiffs appealed from Supreme Court's dismissal of the complaint. The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that the development rights were real property but that plaintiffs had not established that selling the rights would be expedient.

The parties to the action are all siblings. Their parents left a life estate in the family's 101-acre farm to their son for life, or for so long as he used the land for farming. Upon his death, or at the time he ceased farming the land, the property and its improvements would go to the son and his three sisters in equal shares. The son and two of his sisters became interested in preserving the property as farmland by selling some of the development rights associated with the farmland or placing a conservation easement on the farm. When the third sister objected, her siblings brought this action pursuant to RPAPL 1602 seeking a judgment enabling them to sell the development rights to the farm to preserve it as a farm, or enabling them to place a conservation easement on the farm. Supreme Court dismissed the action, concluding that relief under section 1602 was unavailable because development rights are not real property within the meaning of section 1602. The life tenant and the plaintiff sisters appealed.