Items in the Daily Development section generally are extracted from the Quarterly Report on Developments in Real Estate Law, published by the ABA Section on Real Property, Probate & Trust Law. Subscriptions to the Quarterly Report are available to Section members only. The cost is nominal. For the last five years, these Reports annually have been collated, updated, indexed and bound into the Annual Survey of Developments in Real Estate Law, volumes 1-5, published by the ABA Press. The Annual Survey volumes are available for sale to the public. Contact Shawn Kaminsky at the ABA. (312) 988 5260. EASEMENTS; CREATION; FORMALITIES: Alabama court upholds rule that easement cannot be created without formality of conveying language in a deed; lease of hunting rights that does not contain conveyancing language creates a personal property right in form of an "license coupled with an interest." David Lee Boykin Family Trust v. Boykin, 661 So.2d 245 (Ala.Civ.App. 1995) The consequence of the ruling in this case was that the grantee of the right could not take advantage of a rule of Alabama property law that limited the forfeiture of real property interests where substantial consideration had been paid. The court overruled the trial court's determination that the breaches of the hunting lease were not so consequential as to permit forfeiture of valuable hunting rights (they had been subleased for $10,000 per year.) Although the breaches did no permanent damage to the lessor's estate, they were in violation of the express language of the lease, and therefore the lessee forfeited his lifetime hunting lease rights. Comment 1: This is one of those cases with a "story behind the story." The lessor originally had been a timber company, but at time of suit was a trust created by the lessee apparently in favor of two of lessee's sons. The trusts had over $40 million in assets donated by lessee. The lessee was the former president of the original lessor. Although he had subleased the hunting rights, he clearly was interested in the preservation of them. How did he get so crosswise with the children upon whom he had settled $40 million? Comment 2: It would appear that if the "lease" had simply included some granting language, the court would have applied a different rule. It seems incredible that a modern court would recharacterize a property interest solely on the ground that certain technical formalities had not been met. If the formalities are significant, then no right ought to exist at all. But if the court is prepared to honor the right, then it ought to acknowledge the substance of the right as a real property interest and treat it as such. Comment 3: The Alabama rule requiring deed formalities for the creation of an easement is not followed everywhere, but it might be worth checking the old doctrine in your own state before relying upon the provisions of a simple declaration of covenants and easements in your next subdivision deal. Items reported here and in the ABA publications are for general information purposes only and should not be relied upon in the course of representation or in the forming of decisions in legal matters. Accuracy of data and opinions expressed are the sole responsibility of the DIRT editor and are in no sense the publication of the ABA.