Which of the following should NOT be used interchangeably with covenants?

Conditions should not be used interchangeably with covenants due to the fundamental differences in their legal implications and effects on property interests. A covenant is essentially a promise or agreement in a deed that requires the property owner to either do something (affirmative covenant) or refrain from doing something (restrictive covenant). It typically runs with the land and is enforceable by other parties who have an interest in the property.

On the other hand, a condition involves a specific event or circumstance that, if it occurs, will terminate an interest in the property. Conditions can affect the rights to the property more drastically than covenants as they can lead to a forfeiture of ownership if the condition is violated. This makes conditions a much more serious and often less flexible tool in land use compared to covenants.

Restrictions entail limitations on how the property can be used but do not necessarily create a potential forfeiture situation like conditions. Easements grant specific rights to use a portion of someone's property for a designated purpose, such as access or utilities, without transferring ownership. Rights generally refer to a broad range of entitlements related to land ownership and use.

Therefore, while each term relates to property rights and land use, the legal nature and consequences of conditions are distinct enough that they do