According to the law of emblements, which situation is correct?

The law of emblements allows a seller who has cultivated crops on a property to retain the right to those crops even after the property is sold, as long as the crops are not yet harvested at the time of the sale. This legal principle is grounded in the idea that the seller has invested time, labor, and resources into growing the crops and should therefore have the opportunity to reap the benefits of that investment before relinquishing full ownership of the land.

In this context, the correct answer reflects the seller's ability to maintain rights to the crops even after transferring ownership of the property. This ensures that the seller can harvest and profit from the crops they planted, providing a fair solution to the potential conflict that might arise when property ownership changes while crops are still growing.

The other choices do not align with the law of emblements. For example, the option that suggests the buyer gets everything with no rights retained by the seller misrepresents the law, which specifically protects the seller's right to their crops. Similarly, statements about the buyer receiving only the farmhouse or obtaining profits from already harvested crops fail to account for the seller's ongoing rights under the emblements doctrine.