Seminar for paralegal studies
FORUM RESPONSE 1:
If a property owner agrees to have an easement with a neighbor or utility company, this easement is permanent. It is then passed on to the next owner of the property, and it will come up on the title search. It is important to know the terms and conditions of the easement. The neighbor might share part of the driveway or part of the land to get to his or her driveway that has been agree upon in the past. The new owners must abide by this agreement. This goes the same for a utility company. There may be a line burried in the ground somewhere on the property that a utility company may need access to at any given time. The owner must grant the access to them as it has been agreed upon in the past. There is nothing that can be done about it. It is important to see how the previous owners worked things out in the past with the easement holders. This will help for things to run more smoothly with accessing the easements. 
More or less, the property owner is burdened by the use of the easement owner for the piece of land. The property owner does not benefit from the easement use. He just has to abide by the rules of the easement. Storing property in your neighbor’s basement is not considered an easement, but sharing part of a driveway to enter your property through your neighbor’s is an easement. This would also be something that railroad tracks fall under. Railroad tracks run through property owner’s property. It is an easement for use of that piece of land, and the property owner cannont do anything about it. 
If your land has an easement on it, it is important to understand all of the rules that go with it. Brendon Desimone, What You Should Know About Easements and Rights-of-Way Zillow Porchlight (2012), https://www.zillow.com/blog/what-you-should-know-a… (last visited Oct 23, 2018).  Property Easements – and What You Should Know About Them, JDSA Law, https://www.jdsalaw.com/law-talk-archives/2018/5/8… (last visited Oct 23, 2018).
FORUM RESPONSE 2:
Great work Katlyn. Thanks for starting us off on this week’s discussion. I have some follow up questions to your post. How does a landowner learn in the first place that there are easements on his or her property? What if a property owner has owned a piece of property for fifty years and no one has been using an easement of way for the duration of his or her ownership? Does the lack of use for an extended period of time terminate an easement?
History of peacekeeping 1988-present
FORUM RESPONSE 3:
Peacekeeping in its very definition implies certain caveats. Bolton explains that peacekeeping traditionally is “…subject to three preconditions: (a) consent among the parties to the dispute; (b) neutrality of the UN forces deployed; and (c) the use of force by UN personnel essentially only for self-defense” (Bolton 2001, 130). However, while these preconditions were often effective in conflicts that had reached a point of relative ripeness to resolution, the complexity of emerging intrastate conflict required the adaption of a peacemaking or as Bolton explains it, a “peace enforcement” mission (Bolton 2001, 130). This mission in turn implies “…the UN’s willingness and the ability to use force to achieve its objectives” (Bolton 2001, 130). Collectively, these two missions are very different in terms of the resources and commitment needed for successful implementation.
When discussing a theoretical peacekeeping operation within the Korean Peninsula, a couple of broad assumptions must be made. First, it is implied that a relative ceasefire has been achieved. Not unlike the current state of stalemate in this region, one could say that peace has been kept for the better part of the last half of the century. In contrast, if this was not the case, it is safe to say that intervention on the part of the international community would unequivocally need to be calculated and cautious. Secondly, it is assuming a conflict in the current sphere of international context in terms of power distribution in terms of military and economic means.
To insert a peacemaking force within the hostilities of ongoing conflict risks muddying the waters of the already turbulent environment. Specifically, this practice would entail mediation void of the consent of one or more of the conflicting parties and subsequently risk the complete effort being labeled as an interest-motivated endeavor by predatory third parties. Two such parties come to mind specifically, in both the United States and China. Each of these superpowers have largely demonstrated the tendency to utilize involvement in international organizations only to the level that suits their interests within the region or within the international community at large (Neethling 2015, 7) (Bolton 2001, 129-130). While some could argue that in many cases peace is justified even at the expense of external interests, interest-based support and involvement in international relations can also make peace more difficult to attain.
On the other hand from an optimistic perspective, in a globalized world, the UN could leverage these interests to gain cooperation for peacekeeping efforts within the peninsula. Historically, China has sought involvement within UN operations to help balance the power of the United States (Stahle 2008, 653-654). Coincidently, neither side is projected to absolve their historical interests in the region, but their tendency to balance each other’s influence within the UN may contribute to a balanced approach that is both well-supported, and well-defined. One that limits the indiscriminate use of force but is capable of withstanding the influence of internal spoilers.
In conclusion, theoretically, a peacekeeping effort in its traditional sense of the word is largely what we have right now. Subsequently, the 50-60 year stalemate is not a perfect end-state. To quote Jai Shanker Menon, “every peacekeeping operation should have a clear end-of-mission vision” (UNSC 2017, n.p.). In an effort to obtain the vision of a re-united Korean Peninsula, the UN must seek to leverage the most interested parties in the resolution of this conflict in a manner that provides avenues for diplomatic discussions while simultaneously heading off spoilers. The end state provides an additional country capable of engaging in a globalized economy that would benefit not only itself, but also the international community. It seems very evident throughout the past 8 weeks that one cannot fully separate interests from politics, but perhaps interests can be leveraged to gain the support and commitment necessary to solving one of the longest and most high-profile stalemates in history.
Bolton, J. R. (2001). United states policy on united nations peacekeeping. World Affairs, 163(3), 129-147. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/211152105?accountid=8289. (Accessed 22 October 2018).
Neethling, T. (2015). CHINA’S INTERNATIONAL PEACEKEEPING CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE EVOLUTION OF CONTEMPORARY CHINESE STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS. Strategic Review for Southern Africa, 37(2), 7-28. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1764183602?accountid=8289. (Accessed 22 October 2018).
Stähle, S. (2008). China’s Shifting Attitude Towards United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. The China Quarterly, (195), 631-655. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20192238. (Accessed 22 October 2018).
UNSC (2017). “Force Commanders Outline Challenges Facing United Nations Peacekeeping Efforts in Briefing to Security Council.” United Nations.org. Security Council, Meeting 7937. https://www.un.org/press/en/2017/sc12834.doc.htm. (Accessed 22 October 2018).
FORUM RESPONSE 4:
You don’t mention the role that democracy would play in the process of peacekeeping. Do you believe that democratic principles and respect for the rule of law would play a role in peacekeeping operations?