Which statement best describes an implied reciprocal servitude?

Which statement best describes an implied reciprocal servitude?

• A. It requires express recording
• B. It is created by a later writing
• C. It is inferred from a common scheme among parcels and binds successors
• D. It cannot be enforced against successors

Answer: (C)

An implied reciprocal servitude arises when a subdivision is developed with a common scheme of restrictions that applies to all parcels. Because the plan shows a uniform set of limitations across the lots, those covenants are treated as running with the land, binding not just the current owners but successors in interest who buy within the scheme. Even if a particular deed doesn’t expressly mention the covenants, the buyer is presumed to have notice of the overall plan, and the restrictions operate throughout the subdivision. This is why it’s described as inferred from a common scheme among parcels and binding successors. It doesn’t depend on a specific recorded clause in every deed, isn’t created by a later writing, and it does bind future owners, not be unenforceable against them.

An implied reciprocal servitude arises when a subdivision is developed with a common scheme of restrictions that applies to all parcels. Because the plan shows a uniform set of limitations across the lots, those covenants are treated as running with the land, binding not just the current owners but successors in interest who buy within the scheme. Even if a particular deed doesn’t expressly mention the covenants, the buyer is presumed to have notice of the overall plan, and the restrictions operate throughout the subdivision. This is why it’s described as inferred from a common scheme among parcels and binding successors. It doesn’t depend on a specific recorded clause in every deed, isn’t created by a later writing, and it does bind future owners, not be unenforceable against them.