Heidi+Robertson

Heidi Robertson's Revisions

1) Housing

John, Jane, Steve and Bill, together with their families – unable to afford housing [CSU1] – inhabit homes in an development project, suspended due to delayed authorizations. The project was undertaken by //[SB1]]// // ] a private corporation under contract with a public agency. The four friends and their families move in to the development adding improvements to the premises, making the houses habitable [CSU2]. After a couple of months, the private corporation [CSU3] then discovers the four families and attempts to evict them. The families refuse to leave and seek the assistance of a lawyer [CSU4]. The four friends sue [CSU5] // //[SB3]]// // ]  //

// 2) Food //

// The same four friends as in question 1, together with their families, start a communal garden on a vacant plot of land. [CSU6] Soon, the initial group is joined by other neighbors contributing to the garden [CSU7]. Max, the owner of the plot of land, discover the four families and attempts not only to evict them but also to claim ownership over the food grown by the families on his land. [CSU8] //

// 3) Water: Rural //

// Bob, Steve and Jane depend on the water of Flumia, a nearby river. [CSU9] The three friends, together with other villagers in the area build aqueducts and an irrigation canal from the river to their respective homes and fields. After a few years, a private corporation acquired the right to manage the distribution [CSU10] of public water in the region, including the water of the Flumia river. The corporation is now demanding a fee for the water used by Bob, Steve, Jane and the other farmers. Bob, Steve and Jane sue. [CSU11]

4) Water 2: Urban

Bob, Steve and Jane are three friends that inhabit a community housing building in a city, Flumiapolis. Following a large increase in the price of water (200% over 2 years,) the three friends begin to fail to pay their water bills. After failing to pay the third bill, the water management company -- a private/public partnership – cut off their building’s access to the water supply. Bob, Steve, and Jane sue. [CSU12]

5) Nature

Steve, Jane and their two children used to spend many weekends walking and playing in one of the few green areas at the outskirts of the city where they live. The land includes a wide wooded area and a small lake. The land belongs to a private owner who lives in a small house near the lake. The landowner decides to enclose all of the land he owns with a fence in order to keep it pristine and free from noisy picnicking families [CSU13]. Steve and Jane sue. [CSU14]

Variation 1) Assume that Steve and Jane discover a rare species of frog on the land: how does this support/undermine their claim? The claim of the landowner? [CSU15]

Variation 2) Assume that the landowner, rather than simply fencing the land to protect it from wanderers, would like to enclose the land for a commercial purpose: how would this alter the rights/entitlements of both parties?

6) Education/Knowledge [CSU16]

Laura is an engineering student at a public university. During the fall semester, as part of her course of study, she has been working with 20 classmates to design a new type of hydraulic pump. To work on this project, the students communicate with each other through an online system owned by the university. The evolving project drawings are kept on university servers. At the end of the semester, the university announced that the tuition fee is being raised. Laura has not paid the increased tuition and is thus unenrolled in the course. cannot afford to keep being enrolled [CSU17]. Because she is not enrolled, Laura is removed from the data systems of the university. Laura, however, expresses her desire to continue working on the project and sharing ideas with the other students. She would also liketo continue receiving credit for her work towards her degree. The university denies her requests [CSU18] and she sues. Furthermore, Laura has decided to post the hydraulic pump project online as an open engineering project to which fellow engineers can contribute online. [CSU19] The university discovers the pump project on the open website and sues Laura. [CSU20] Laura files a counter suit.

7)Care: Health, Legal, Children & Elderly

Laura, together with other people from her neighborhood, has organized a non-profit day care center in an abandoned building after the closing of a nearby state-funded? day care center and elderly care center as result of massive state budget cuts. The new center is staffed by volunteers who take care of children and elderly people when their parents and relatives are at work,. [CSU21] Soon after, Steve, a doctor, in cooperation with Laura, sets up a medical clinic in the same otherwise abandoned building offering free services to irregular migrants who have no health insurance. Jane, a lawyer, hearing about the clinic also joins the group by offering free legal services for irregular migrants who would otherwise not have access to legal advice. Daniel, the owner of the building, would like to evict these buildingusers in order to sell the building that he has recently inherited from his uncle John. Many people in the area are upset by this news and Laura, Steve and Jane sue. [CSU22]

These facts are added to make it more realistic that it is not totally unreasonable for the parties to have taken up residence in what is a non active/abandoned site. //

// Ugo suggested that every scenario should be adversarial.

Ugo says that in the CC tradition there are no questions necessary but rather the reporters infer the questions from the fact based scenario. //

// We took this out because it limited the scenario to a commercial as opposed to personal use of water.

[CSU1] I’m wary of this. It’s a subjective measure. Sometimes people have no income, sometimes people spend money on other things. “Unable” just seems a bit loaded. Some may declare themselves unable, when they’re really not, while others will struggle and not admit that they really have no options. I’m also not sure it’s relevant or necessary to the fundamental question on rights of access. Does “ability” to pay make a difference? [CSU2] Again—is there a legal definition of habitable? I think it’s enough to say that they made improvements to the premises. [CSU3] Owner? Who holds title to the land and buildings? The development company? The government agency? [CSU4] What is their claim? Are they seeking to be declared owners – that is, are they looking for a property interest in the development as a result of their possession and improvements? Or are they just seeking the right to stay (and pay rent?) [CSU5] Claiming what? I’d make this more specific [CSU6] Same comment here. “cannot afford good” is too subjective. It’s enough that they worked the land and that the land is vacant. Does it matter what they say they can afford or not afford? [CSU7] Needs more facts. Additional non-owners of the vacant property begin to plant crops and work the land? [CSU8] In this instance, it’s much clearer what the claim is – recovery of possession by Max, and annexation of the crops grown on his land. You’ve already stated a legal problem – and it’s Max’s problem. You don’t need the counterclaim here,. [CSU9] For personal use? Commercial use? [CSU10] Is this just a management contract? The company doesn’t own the water – the water is public domain, right? [CSU11] Need more information about the fee. Is it enacted by regulation? Collected by the company as an agent for the government agency? Applied universally? By volume of water used? Etc. [CSU12] Claiming. . . what? Costs too high? Company/govt org had not right to change fees? Not enough notice? There are so many possible claims. Did everyone in the building fail to pay? Did some people pay, but not have water as a result of B, S, and J’s nonpayment? [CSU13] I think this complicates matters. You haven’t said that Steve and Jane are noisy. Maybe just say to keep it pristine and generally keep people off of the land? Has the owner had problems with noisy people? People going too clase to the house? [CSU14] Allemansratt? [CSU15] What if the owner, not Steve and Jane discover the frog? Does that improve the owner’s claim to close the land? [CSU16] This question isn’t really about education or knowledge. It’s more about unpaid access to a communication system, to intellectual property (the plans) and to free tuition (course credit without paying tuition.) [CSU17] Again – I’d take this out. You just need to say that tuition was raised, she has not paid tuition, and is no longer enrolled. I’d stick to the facts, not the subjective stuff. [CSU18] She’s made multiple requests – access to the work product, access to the communication system, credit without paying tuition. [CSU19] Have her classmates agreed to this? This would mean posting something 20 other people have worked on -- [CSU20] For what? Theft of intellectual property? What is her claim? [CSU21] Better with just facts – not subjective judgments [CSU22] Claiming. . ..