PAYMENT FOR AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF EASEMENTS: SPECIAL ISSUES. UTAH STATE BAR SUMMER CONVENTION Snowmass, Colorado
|
|
- Derick Morris
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 PAYMENT FOR AND EXTINGUISHMENT OF EASEMENTS: SPECIAL ISSUES UTAH STATE BAR SUMMER CONVENTION Snowmass, Colorado Friday, July 18, :30 a.m. RUSSELL A. CLINE Presenter CRIPPEN & CLINE, P.C. 10 South 100 West, Suite 425 Salt Lake City, UT
2 EXPRESS EASEMENTS 1. Written easements are interpreted based on the ordinary rules of contract construction. Under Utah law, [w]here the parties to a deed use broad language that admits of no qualification, courts should honor that choice and hold them to it. Stern v. Metro. Water Dist. of Salt Lake & Sandy, 2012 UT 16, 59, 274 P.3d 935 (finding that scope of canal purposes was broad enough to include culinary water and to refer to an enclosed pipeline); [d]eeds are construed according to ordinary rules of contract construction. If contract terms are clear and unambiguous, we normally interpret them according to their plain and ordinary meaning without resorting to extrinsic evidence. ) Homer v. Smith, 866 P.2d 622, 629 (Utah Ct. App. 1993) (citing Hartman v. Potter, 596 P.2d 653, 656 (Utah 1979); Equitable Life & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Ross, 849 P.2d 1187, 1192 (Utah Ct. App. 1993)). 2. Where the description of the easement is plain and unambiguous parole evidence is inadmissible. It is the court's duty to construe instruments as written and deeds are to be construed like other written instruments. When a deed is plain and unambiguous, parole evidence is not admissible to vary its terms. Gillmor v. Cummings, 904 P.2d 703, 706 (Utah Ct. App. 1995) (quoting Hartman, 596 P.2d at 656). 3. A written easement may be limited by historical use. In Wood v. Ashby, 253 P.2d 351, 354 (Utah 1952), the original deed from grantor to grantee reserved to the grantor a right of way for road purposes across the above described premises. Id. at 352. Although the two parcels were adjacent at the time of the conveyance, there was a 2
3 fence and a gate through which vehicle access occurred. Id. at The court found that reservation of a right of way for road access purposes was a restricted reservation rather than a general reservation, and limited to access through the gate. Id. at 353. [W]here the provisions of a deed are doubtful the court may also look to the practical construction placed upon the instrument by the parties. Wood, 253 P.2d at 354; Stern, 2012 UT 16, 60 n.31 (quoting 4-34 Powell on Real Property (Michael A. Wolf ed., 2012) ( When a conveyance is unclear as to the scope of the intended easement, the subsequent behavior of the parties can constitute a practical construction furnishing the missing details. )). In interpreting the scope of the easement, the Wood court found that the construction of the fence and the gate allowing ingress and egress was a construction of the deed by the parties and established the location of the right of way. 253 P.2d at Written easements need not be limited by historical use. See 4-34 Powell on Real Property (Michael A. Wolf ed., 2012) (citing, among others, Lynam v. Clayville, 128 A.2d 316, 318 (Del. 1957) (finding that unlimited grant of easement permitting access to retained land was not limited to its original use for farming purposes); Cooper v. Sawyer, 405 P.2d 394, 401 (Haw. 1965) ( Under an unrestricted grant of a right of way by easement, the possessor of the dominant tenement may use the right of way in a manner which allows the fullest possible development of the dominant estate within the limits of reasonable enjoyment... Such a way is not limited to the purposes for which the dominant estate was used at the time the way was created. (quoting Mahon v. Tully, 139 N.E. 797, 799 (Mass. 1923)). 3
4 5. An express easement is generally not extinguished by subdivision, even where the subdivided parcel does not abut the way, as long as the same access is used. An express easement is generally not extinguished by subdivision where a parcel is subdivided: An easement is not extinguished by a division of the estate to which it is appurtenant, but the owner or assignee of any portion of that estate may claim the right, so far as it is applicable to his part of the property, provided the right can be enjoyed, as to the respective parcels, without any additional burden upon the servient estate; accordingly, a right of way, which is appurtenant to an estate, is appurtenant to every part of it, no matter into how many parts it may be subdivided, and it inures to the benefit of the owners of all subdivisions so situated that it can be used. Rollo v. Nelson, 96 P. 263, 265 (Utah 1908) (quotation omitted). In Bradbury v. Valencia, 2004 WL , 2004 UT App 289, at *3-4 (unpublished opinion) which involved an express easement, the court stated: although the dominant estate (now the Bradburys parcel) has been divided and no longer abuts the servient estate (now the Valencia s parcel), no evidenced has been presented to suggest that this property division has increased the burden of use of the right-of-way by the dominant estate. (emphasis added) (affirming summary judgment in favor of Bradburys and finding that easement was not extinguished even though it did not abut the way following partition of the dominant estate). See also Wood v. Ashby, 253 P.2d 351, 354 (Utah 1952) ( The question raised by this assignment, it should be noted, is not whether Christensen, should he secure access thereto, may use the decreed restricted way for ingress and egress. Indeed, plaintiff indicates in his brief that he would have no objection to his doing so. ) 4
5 6. A written easement may be extinguished as to a subdivided parcel that no longer abuts the way that results in an increased burden. In Wood v. Ashby, 253 P.2d 351 (Utah 1952) the original grantor had sold part of the original parcel to a third-party. Although the severed property was adjacent to the servient property, the severed parcel did not abut the way i.e., did not abut the point of access, but one had to cross the other part of the remaining original property to access the gate. The Wood court held that the easement did not grant the third party access to the part of the servient estate that was adjacent to the severed parcel: The partition of the document tenement cannot create a further or additional easement across a servient tenement, and an easement of way does not inure for the benefit of the owner of a parcel which after the division does not abut on the way and where the resulting use will increase the burden upon the servient estate, the right to the easement will be extinguished. Id. at 354. (Emphasis added.) 7. When is an Easement Overburdened? In considering whether an easement has been overburdened: Utah law looks to the language of the grant, the circumstances attending the transaction, the situation of the parties, the state of the thing granted, and the object to be obtained, construing the instrument most strongly against the grantor and most favorably to the grantee, to determine what use is permitted. An overburdening of an easement by the dominant estate may only occur if use of the easement substantially increases use of the servient estate beyond that contemplated by the parties at the time of the grant. Lutheran High Sch. Ass n v. Woodlands III Holdings, LLC, 2003 UT App 403, 15, 81 P.3d 792 (emphasis added). In addition, Utah recognizes the common law presumption that parties to an easement anticipate increased future use and reasonable technological 5
6 improvements. Stern, 2012 UT 16, 69 & n.39, 274 P.3d 935 (citing, among other authorities, Hubble v. Cache Cnty. Drainage Dist. No. 3, 259 P.2d 893, 896 (Utah 1953) ( [T]he law favors changes and improvements for the benefit of the dominant estate so long as the manifest intent of the parties does not disallow the changes and the burden on the servient tenement is not increased. ); Parris Props., L.L.C. v. Nichols, 700 S.E.2d 848, 854 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010) ( [A] change in the manner, frequency, and intensity of use of the easement within the physical boundaries of the existing easement is permitted without the consent of the other party, so long as the change is not so substantial as to cause unreasonable damage to the servient estate or unreasonably interfere with its enjoyment. )). A severed parcel is not entitled to additional separate access across the servient estate. Wood v. Ashby, 253 P.2d 351, 355 (Utah 1952). To grant additional separate access creates an additional burden. PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENTS 8. Prescriptive Easement. To establish a claim for prescriptive easement, plaintiffs must prove that their use of defendant s property has been (1) open, (2) notorious, (3) adverse, and (4) continuous for at least 20 years. Van Denburgh v. Sweeney Land Co., 2013 UT App 265, 3, 315 P.3d 1058 (citing Marchant vs. Park City 788 P 2d 520, 524 (Utah 1990)). Plaintiffs have the burden of proving each element by clear and convincing evidence. Id. To be adverse, plaintiffs must prove that plaintiffs use of defendant s property was adverse to the owner of the servient tenement. Am. Jur. 2d Easements and Licenses 55. An acknowledgment within the prescriptive period of a superior right to another party by the person claiming a 6
7 prescriptive easement prevents the use from being deemed adverse. Id. Adverse use must be a trespassory use and must constitute an actual invasion or infringement of the owner s rights. Id. 56. The use must be against the owner as distinguished from under the owner. Jensen v. Brown, 639 P.2d 150, 152 (Utah 1981). 9. Where a prescriptive easement exists, severance of a parcel (from the dominant estate), that does not abut the servient estate, may extinguish the easement as to the servered parcel. In Alvey Development Corp. v. Mackelprang, 2002 UT App 220, 51 P.3d 45 (Utah Ct. App. 2002), the court held that where a prescriptive easement exists and the dominant estate had been severed and the severed parcel no longer abuts the servient estate, the easement is extinguished as to the severed parcel. Id. 14 ( [A]t the time of the 1987 transfer, Alvey s land did not abut on the way, therefore, Alvey s right to the easement... [was] extinguished. (quoting Wood, 253 P.2d at 354)). EASEMENTS BY IMPLICATION/EASEMENT BY NECESSITY 10. Easement by Implication. The elements necessary to constitute an easement by implication under Utah law are: (1) that unity of title was followed by severance; (2) that the servitude was apparent, obvious, and visible at the time of severance; (3) that the easement was reasonably necessary to the enjoyment of the dominant estate; and (4) that the use of the easement was continuous rather than sporadic. Butler v. Lee, 774 P.2d 1150, 1152 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). 11. Easement by necessity. Under Utah law, an easement by necessity arises where there is a conveyance of part of a tract of land which is so situated that either the 7
8 part conveyed or the part retained is surrounded with no access to a road to the outer world. Tschaggeny v. Union Pac. Land Resources Corp., 555 P.2d 277, 280 (Utah 1976). 12. Do you have to pay for the acquisition of an easement by necessity or an easement by implication? No (but you do pay for your proportionate share of maintenance costs). An easement by necessity has a right of access that is appurtenant to the dominant parcel and travels with the land, so long as the necessity exists. By acquiring the dominant estate, one has already paid for and procured the legal right of access to and from that parcel.... [I]f a landowner is entitled to an easement by necessity... compensation for the taking should be denied. Fike v. Shelton, 860 So. 2d 1227, (Miss. 2003) (internal quotation marks omitted) (emphasis added). The same is true for easements by implication: The finding of an easement implied from existing use is equivalent to a finding that such easement right was included in the grant of the dominant estate to defendants in Defendants cannot be forced to purchase, and cannot be held liable for using, that which they already own. Monte v. Di Marco, 596 A.D.2d 1111, 1113 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993). 8
ClydeSnow ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ClydeSnow ATTORNEYS AT LAW D. BRENT ROSE CLYDE SNOW SESSIONS & SWENSON A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION (801) 322-2516 dbr@clydesnow.com ONE UTAH CENTER THIRTEENTH FLOOR 201 S. MAIN STREET SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
More informationPresent: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, and Mims, JJ.
Present: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, and Mims, JJ. MCCARTHY HOLDINGS LLC OPINION BY v. Record No. 101031 JUSTICE S. BERNARD GOODWYN September 16, 2011 VINCENT W. BURGHER, III FROM THE CIRCUIT
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 13, 2012 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE December 13, 2012 Session BARRY RUSSELL, ET AL. v. HENDERSONVILLE UTILITY DISTRICT Appeal from the Chancery Court for Sumner County No. 2010C120 Tom E.
More information~ Indiana ~ Easements and Rights of Way ~ ~ ~ IRWA Chapter 10 Annual Law Day. Indianapolis, Indiana. October 18, Presented by Gary R.
~ Indiana ~ Easements and Rights of Way ~ ~ ~ IRWA Chapter 10 Annual Law Day Indianapolis, Indiana October 18, 2017 Presented by Gary R. Kent, PS EASEMENT A limited, nonpossessory interest in the land
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JACKSON COUNTY
[Cite as Watson v. Neff, 2009-Ohio-2062.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT JACKSON COUNTY Jeffrey S. Watson, Trustee, : : Plaintiff-Appellant, : : Case No. 08CA12 v. : : DECISION
More informationJUDGMENT REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. Division III Opinion by: JUDGE RUSSEL Casebolt and Graham JJ., concur
COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0538 El Paso County District Court No. 03CV4670 Honorable Rebecca S. Bromley, Judge Carol S. Matoush, Plaintiff Appellee, v. David H. Lovingood and Debra
More informationA Deep Dive into Easements
A Deep Dive into Easements Diane B. Davies, John A. Lovett, James C. Smith I. Introduction Easements are ubiquitous in the United States. They serve an invaluable function. They allow persons and property
More informationI Am Not Your Attorney.
By Jeffery N. Lucas Professional Land Surveyor Attorney at Law 2002 2016 All Rights Reserved Lucas & Company, LLC DISCLAIMER I Am Not Your Attorney. This seminar is not intended to provide you with legal
More informationIN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS. ooooo ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ooooo The Abraham & Associates Trust and Michael Robert Barker, Trustee, v. Plaintiffs and Appellants, James M. Park, Tori L. Park, Dennis Carr, and Donette Carr, Defendants
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed February 23, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Michael R.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 1-087 / 10-0949 Filed February 23, 2011 MARGARET ELLIOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. WAYNE JASPER, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION II RANDALL INGOLD TRUST, by and through its trustee, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., No. 41115-6-II Respondent, v. STEPHANIE L. ARMOUR, DOES 1-5, UNPUBLISHED
More informationBARBARA BEACH OPINION BY v. Record No JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS FEBRUARY 27, 2014 JAY TURIM, TRUSTEE, ET AL.
PRESENT: All the Justices BARBARA BEACH OPINION BY v. Record No. 130682 JUSTICE DONALD W. LEMONS FEBRUARY 27, 2014 JAY TURIM, TRUSTEE, ET AL. FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ALEXANDRIA Lisa B. Kemler,
More informationMURPHY, et al. OLSEN, et al.
MURPHY, et al. v. OLSEN, et al. 04-P-431 Appeals Court JAMES F. MURPHY, trustee,[1] & others[2] vs. JANET L. OLSEN & others.[3] No. 04-P-431. Suffolk. February 18, 2005. - May 4, 2005. Present: Greenberg,
More informationc. elimination as encumbrance 1) express release 2) review of specific facts with underwriter (general description)
TITLE ISSUES IN EASEMENTS AND CCR S I Easements (the Company ) insures, as of Date of Policy and, to the extent stated in Covered Risks 9 and 10, after Date of Policy, against loss or damage, not exceeding
More informationPresent: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Whiting, 1 Hassell, and Keenan, JJ.
Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Whiting, 1 Hassell, and Keenan, JJ. Lacy, RICHARD F. DAVIS, ET AL. v. Record No. 941971 OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY September 15, 1995 JOHN T. HENNING,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 12, 2009 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 12, 2009 Session MICHAEL AND CAROLYN REGEN v. EAST FORK FARMS, LP, ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No. 07-2882-II Carol
More informationSTATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A Jeffrey Apitz, et al., Appellants, vs. Terry Hopkins, et al., Respondents.
STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A14-1166 Jeffrey Apitz, et al., Appellants, vs. Terry Hopkins, et al., Respondents. Filed May 18, 2015 Reversed and remanded Peterson, Judge Itasca County District
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs September 4, 2018
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs September 4, 2018 10/05/2018 HERBERT T. STAFFORD v. MATTHEW L. BRANAN Appeal from the Chancery Court for Sequatchie County No. 2482
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. WILLIAM SOUKUP & a. ROBERT BROOKS & a. Argued: February 19, 2009 Opinion Issued: June 12, 2009
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS ROBERT LITTLE and BARBARA LITTLE, Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants- Appellants, UNPUBLISHED March 23, 2006 v No. 257781 Oakland Circuit Court THOMAS TRIVAN, DARLENE TRIVAN,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MATTHEW J. SCHUMACHER, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION April 1, 2003 9:10 a.m. v No. 233143 Midland Circuit Court DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PAUL MARINO and LINDA MARINO, Plaintiffs-Appellants, UNPUBLISHED June 19, 2001 v No. 215764 Wayne Circuit Court GRAYHAVEN ESTATES LTD., LLC, LC No. 98-813922-CH GRAYHAVEN-LENOX
More informationBob s: Relevant Factors (p. 538)
Eversole to Parman deed for Bob s store parcel did not grant Parman an express easement over parking lot Should the court have implied such an easement, based on prior use of parking lot by the Parmans
More informationNO IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1996
NO. 95-519 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1996 A.C. WARNACK, Trustee of the A.C. WARNACK TRUST; and KENNETH R. MCDONALD, v. Plaintiffs, Appellants and Cross-Respondents, THE CONEEN FAMILY
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JOHN T. RUDY and ANN LIZETTE RUDY, Plaintiffs-Appellees, UNPUBLISHED February 22, 2011 v No. 293501 Cass Circuit Court DAN LINTS and VICKI LINTS, LC No. 08-000138-CZ
More informationPRESENT: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, Mims, and Powell, JJ., and Russell, S.J.
PRESENT: Kinser, C.J., Lemons, Goodwyn, Millette, Mims, and Powell, JJ., and Russell, S.J. MAC R. CLIFTON, ET AL. OPINION BY v. Record No. 121232 SENIOR JUSTICE CHARLES S. RUSSELL September 12, 2013 EVELYN
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON June 19, 2008 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON June 19, 2008 Session TERESA WALKER NEWMAN v. WAYNE WOODARD, ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Lauderdale County No. 13749 William C. Cole,
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants.
STATE OF IDAHO County of BONNER ss FILED AT O'Clock M CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Deputy IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BONNER PHYLLIS A.
More informationNo January 3, P.2d 750
Printed on: 10/20/01 Page # 1 84 Nev. 15, 15 (1968) Meredith v. Washoe Co. Sch. Dist. THOMAS K. MEREDITH and ROSE N. MEREDITH, Appellants, v. WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a Political Subdivision of the
More informationInsuring Easements Prepared By: Stewart J. Skip Sacks, Virginia State Counsel Stewart Title Guaranty Company
Insuring Easements Prepared By: Stewart J. Skip Sacks, Virginia State Counsel Stewart Title Guaranty Company I. Overview of Easements (10 min) A. Definition An Easement is an interest in land owned by
More informationNOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 116,364 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. JAMES F. SHEPHERD, Appellee,
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 116,364 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS JAMES F. SHEPHERD, Appellee, v. PAULINE THOMPSON, et al., Appellants. MEMORANDUM OPINION 2017. Affirmed. Appeal
More information2018 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1
KeyCite Yellow Flag - Negative Treatment Distinguished by Phelan v. Rosener, Mo.App. E.D., February 28, 2017 473 S.W.3d 233 Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two. Peter H. Love, 7701
More information1.0 Law & Legal CLE Credit A/V Approval # Recording Date November 1, 2017 Recording Availability June 12, 2018
1.0 Law & Legal CLE Credit A/V Approval #1072343 Recording Date November 1, 2017 Recording Availability June 12, 2018 Meeting Location Date Time Topic King County Bar Association 1200 Fifth Avenue - Suite
More informationWOODLE v. COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, 287 Neb Neb. 917
Page 1 of 8 287 Neb. 917 BRAD WOODLE AND CHASE WOODLE, APPELLANTS, v. COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A NEBRASKA CORPORATION, AND OMAHA TITLE & ESCROW, INC., A NEBRASKA CORPORATION, APPELLEES.
More informationENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO JULY TERM, 2018
Note: In the case title, an asterisk (*) indicates an appellant and a double asterisk (**) indicates a crossappellant. Decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered as precedent before any
More informationDrafting Easement Agreements Practical Considerations & Potential Pitfalls
Drafting Easement Agreements Practical Considerations & Potential Pitfalls Paul G. Carey Dickenson, Peatman & Fogarty 1455 First Street, Suite 301 Napa, California 94559 (707) 252-7122 pcarey@dpf-law.com
More informationMTAS MORe. Sincerely,
Published on MTAS (http://www.mtas.tennessee.edu) Home > Printer-friendly PDF > Printer-friendly PDF > Permanent Utility Easement and Temporary Construction Easement Dear Reader: The following document
More informationTEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00505-CV Lillie Phillips, Appellant v. Irene Schneider, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 169TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 236,506-C,
More informationEasements. A Panel Discussion of Particular Problems & Solutions
Easements A Panel Discussion of Particular Problems & Solutions (a/k/a there are two ways to handle easements, the right of way, and the wrong of way.) Drake Real Estate Seminar March 23, 2018 Panel Members
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
Notice: This opinion is subject to correction before publication in the PACIFIC REPORTER. Readers are requested to bring errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, 303 K Street, Anchorage,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed August 25, Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cedar County, Mark J.
MARK BINNS and GRACE BINNS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, vs. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 0-498 / 09-1571 Filed August 25, 2010 DON STEWART and BRENDA STEWART, Defendants-Appellants. Judge. Appeal from
More informationParty Walls. Institutional Repository. University of Miami Law School. Mark S. Berman. University of Miami Law Review
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 7-1-1971 Party Walls Mark S. Berman Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Recommended
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO HOLY DONUT, LLC ) CASE NO. CV 12 790472 ) Plaintiff, ) JUDGE JOHN P. O DONNELL ) vs. ) ) MO UN YEE GEE, et al. ) JOURNAL ENTRY GRANTING IN ) PART HOLY
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS MARILYN A. DZINGLE TRUST, by MARILYN A. DZINGLE, Trustee, UNPUBLISHED February 14, 2017 Plaintiff-Appellee, v No. 330614 Isabella Circuit Court JAMES EARL PLATT, LC No.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY APPEARANCES:
[Cite as Esteph v. Grumm, 175 Ohio App.3d 516, 2008-Ohio-1121.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY Esteph et al., : Case No. 07CA6 Appellees, : v. : DECISION AND JUDGMENT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE HENRY BLACK, MARY LOU BLACK, RAYMOND BUCHTA, W. SCOTT BLACK, AND BLACKBALL PROPERTIES, Defendants Below- Appellants, v. GARY STAFFIERI and ADRIA CHARLES STAFFIERI,
More informationSYLLABUS. 3. Under Compiled Laws, Section 3179, a suit for partition may be maintained notwithstanding the land in question is subject to an easement.
THOMPSON V. DE SNYDER, 1908-NMSC-011, 14 N.M. 403, 94 P. 1014 (S. Ct. 1908) LEVI R. THOMPSON, et al., Appellants, vs. MARIA INEZ GARCIA de SNYDER, Appellee No. 1132 SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1908-NMSC-011,
More information2017COA159. No. 16CA1494, Lakewood v. Armstrong Real Property Easements Appurtenant Easement Deeds Dominant Estate
The summaries of the Colorado Court of Appeals published opinions constitute no part of the opinion of the division but have been prepared by the division for the convenience of the reader. The summaries
More informationProperty, Equitable Servitudes, Creation and Enforceability- pp , 772 November 20, 2006 Crusto s Socratic Dialogue
Property, Equitable Servitudes, Creation and Enforceability- pp. 746-768, 772 November 20, 2006 Crusto s Socratic Dialogue 1. Please provide an Analytical Overview of the Topic. We continue our study of
More informationCLAIRE CROWLEY & a. TOWN OF LOUDON THE LEDGES GOLF LINKS, INC. CLAIRE CROWLEY. Argued: September 21, 2011 Opinion Issued: December 8, 2011
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS HAZEL PARK MANAGEMENT, LLC, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant- Appellee, UNPUBLISHED December 30, 2014 v No. 318779 Oakland Circuit Court C4 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, LC No.
More information2012 IL App (2d) No Opinion filed January 18, 2012 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT
No. 2-11-0060 Opinion filed January 18, 2012 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT MARJORIE C. HAHN, Successor Trustee to ) Appeal from the Circuit Court Robert C. Hahn, Trustee Under Trust
More informationProperty, Servitudes/Easements- pp November 6, 2006 Crusto s Socratic Dialogue. 1. Please provide an Analytical Overview of the Topic.
Property, Servitudes/Easements- pp. 667-677 November 6, 2006 Crusto s Socratic Dialogue 1. Please provide an Analytical Overview of the Topic. This is the last topic we will cover for the semester: the
More informationPERMANENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT. good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, The Esther Harrison
PERMANENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT For and in consideration of the sum of Seven thousand thirty and 00/100 dollars ($7,030.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON January 22, 2014 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON January 22, 2014 Session RICHARD E. RIEGEL, JR. v. PATRICIA A. WILKERSON Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court for Madison County No. 69727 James F. Butler,
More informationThe Use of Negative Easements To Facilitate Construction Projects
The Use of Negative Easements To Facilitate Construction Projects John D. Schwarz Jr., JD California State University, Chico Chico, CA This paper discusses the use of negative easements to facilitate construction
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS COVENTRY PARKHOMES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION October 25, 2012 9:05 a.m. v No. 304188 Oakland Circuit Court FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
More informationState of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department
State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: April 24, 2003 92190 JAMES H. HIGGINS III, as Trustee of the Betty Higgins Inter Vivos Trust, et al.,
More informationSurface Access to Severed Federal Minerals. Prof. Tara Righetti, J.D., CPL
Surface Access to Severed Federal Minerals Prof. Tara Righetti, J.D., CPL ROADMAP 1. Split Estates: What & where are they? 2. Management and Disposal of Federally Owned Minerals: Unitization & the MLA
More informationDAVID RAU v. BRENDA D. COLLINS, NO. 653, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005
HEADNOTE DAVID RAU v. BRENDA D. COLLINS, NO. 653, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005 EASEMENT BY NECESSITY; MICHAEL v. NEEDHAM, 39 MD. APP. 271 (1978); DALTON v. REAL ESTATE AND IMPROVEMENT CO., 201 MD. 34 (1952); BECAUSE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 6 June Appeal by defendants from order entered 18 July 2016 by Judge Jay D.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA16-1189 Filed: 6 June 2017 Onslow County, No. 14 CVS 4011 KINGS HARBOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. ROY T. GOLDMAN and wife, DIANA H. GOLDMAN,
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed June 18, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00735-CV THE STALEY FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD., Appellant V. DAVID LEE STILES, DELZIE STILES,
More informationRAILS- TO- TRAILS PROGRAM IN MICHIGAN. in implementing so- called rails- to- trails programs, which seek to convert unused
Michigan Realtors RAILS- TO- TRAILS PROGRAM IN MICHIGAN A. INTRODUCTION Over the last few decades, all levels of government have been increasingly interested in implementing so- called rails- to- trails
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC LOWER COURT CASE NO. 3D PRIME WEST, INC. and PRIME WEST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC 05-1697 LOWER COURT CASE NO. 3D04-471 PRIME WEST, INC. and PRIME WEST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioners, v. LORENZO CAMARGO and ANA CAMARGO, his wife;
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 1 August TANGLEWOOD PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA17-101 Filed: 1 August 2017 Brunswick County, No. 14 CVD 888 TANGLEWOOD PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. BRANDON WAYNE ISENHOUR; ROBERT
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING 2014 WY 62
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING LEEKS CANYON RANCH, LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; LEEKS CANYON, LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; ELIZABETH LOCKHART and KELLY LOCKHART, wife
More informationCASE NO. 1D An appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County. Marci L. Goodman, Judge.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA GLORIA DIANNE AND FREDDIE L. WINGATE, Husband and Wife, Appellants, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS SOUTH COVE CONDO ASSN, Plaintiff-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED October 31, 2006 v No. 270571 Berrien Circuit Court DUNESCAPE @ NEW BUFFALO II, LTD, LC No. 2005-002810-CZ Defendant-Appellee.
More informationLesson 5: Encumbrances. Encumbrances. Real Estate Principles of Georgia. Encumbrances. Financial vs. Non-financial
Real Estate Principles of Georgia Lesson 5: Encumbrances 1 of 64 105 Encumbrances Encumbrance: A nonpossessory interest in real property held by someone other than the owner. Does not give ownership or
More informationFunctional Description. Servitude Categories. Property. Private Land Use Controls. Module 6 Servitudes
Property Module 6 Servitudes Private Land Use Controls Servitude Categories Major: Easement Covenant Minor: Real Covenant Equitable Servitude Profit License Functional Description A is given right to enter
More informationThird District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2012 Opinion filed September 19, 2012. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D12-360 Lower Tribunal No.
More informationNO. COA Filed: 15 November Easements- servient tenant s impermissible interference with dominant tenant s use-- motion to dismiss
FRANK H. R. FALKSON, KENNETH COLLIER, FRANCIS CARTER, ALBERT G. FOLCHER, III, VICTOR VANCE, BURT MOODY, AND WATERWAY LANDING - POCOSIN FARMS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. CLAYTON LAND CORPORATION,
More informationBlazer v. Wall: The Restriction of the Easement by Reservation Doctrine
Montana Law Review Volume 71 Issue 1 Winter 2010 Article 5 1-2010 Blazer v. Wall: The Restriction of the Easement by Reservation Doctrine Hanna Warhank Attorney, Church, Harris, Johnson & Williams, P.C.,
More information1. Who caught the first pass Brett Favre threw as a Green Bay Packer? 2. Who was the last American League switch-hitter to be named league MVP?
EASEMENTS BY IMPLICATION SCOTT M. LUCAS MARCH 15, 2005 Introduction Here are four good trick questions to ask people: 1. Who caught the first pass Brett Favre threw as a Green Bay Packer? 2. Who was the
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 6, 2018 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 6, 2018 Session 04/09/2018 JERRY HARLAN, ET AL. v. CORNERSTONE CHURCH OF NASHVILLE, INC. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County No.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. District Court of Appeal, First District No INITIAL BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA H & F LAND, INC., Plaintiff/Appellant, Case No. 92,299 vs. District Court of Appeal, First District No. 97-01546 PANAMA CITY - BAY COUNTY AIRPORT AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, Defendant/Appellee.
More informationLitigation of Surveying Court Cases. Daniel Duyck
Litigation of Surveying Court Cases Daniel Duyck Daniel Duyck Whipple & Duyck, PC Attorneys at Law 503-222-6191 dduyck@whippleduyck.com www.whippleduyck.com How Property is Held in Oregon Fee Simple Life
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE August 15, 2007 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE August 15, 2007 Session JUDITH ANN FORD v. JAMES W. ROBERTS, ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Hamilton County No. 01-0846 Howell N. Peoples, Chancellor
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, UNPUBLISHED July 17, 2008 v No. 277039 Oakland Circuit Court EUGENE A. ACEY, ELEANORE ACEY, LC No. 2006-072541-CHss
More informationWATER DUE DILIGENCE:
WATER DUE DILIGENCE: What real estate attorneys should understand about water rights due diligence when their clients are purchasing property with water rights I. A brief history of salient Colorado water
More informationPresent: Carrico, C.J., Lacy, Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, and Lemons, JJ.
Present: Carrico, C.J., Lacy, Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, and Lemons, JJ. ROY HUDSON, ET AL. v. Record No. 000835 OPINION BY JUSTICE CYNTHIA D. KINSER March 2, 2001 RUTH M. PILLOW, ET AL. FROM THE CIRCUIT
More information1 of 1 DOCUMENT. JOHN E. SCRUBY et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. VINTAGE GRAPEVINE, INC., Defendant and Appellant. No. A
Page 1 1 of 1 DOCUMENT JOHN E. SCRUBY et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. VINTAGE GRAPEVINE, INC., Defendant and Appellant. No. A066177. COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVI-
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005 AMERICAN QUICK SIGN, INC. AND BOB PEGRAM, Appellants, v. Case No. 5D04-2099 RICK REINHARDT, ET AL., Appellees. /
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. Opinion Number: Filing Date: May 12, Docket No. 34,083
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: Filing Date: May 12, 2014 Docket No. 34,083 AMETHYST LAND CO., INC., a New Mexico Corporation, v. Plaintiff-Respondent, JAMES F. TERHUNE
More informationPhysical Encumbrances
Physical Encumbrances Types of physical encumbrances include (1) deed restrictions, (2) easements, and (3) encroachments. D eed restrictions A major package of private deed restriction are covenants, conditions
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE LAND AMERICA COMMONWEALTH TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY DOROTHY KOLOZETSKI
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
More informationv No Otsego Circuit Court
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S BERNARD C. SWARTZ DECLARATION OF TRUST DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2009, UNPUBLISHED February 20, 2018 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 335470 Otsego Circuit
More informationAPPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF McDONALD COUNTY. Honorable John R. LePage, Associate Circuit Judge
RUSSELL VAN ELK, Appellant/Cross-Respondent, vs. DARLENE L. URBANEK, as Trustee of the DARLENE L. URBANEK TRUST, Dated May 2, 2005, and Nos. SD 29364 & SD29412 DARLENE L. URBANEK, Individually, Opinion
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON February 25, 2000 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON February 25, 2000 Session TERESA P. CONSTANTINO AND LILA MAE WILLIAMS v. CHARLIE W. WILLIAMS AND GLENDA E. WILLIAMS. An Appeal as of Right from the Chancery
More informationNO CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
NO. 12-11-00281-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS CROWN PINE TIMBER 1, L.P., APPEAL FROM THE 1ST APPELLANT V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT SAMMY DURRETT, APPELLEE SABINE
More informationClearing Title for Defects Due to Easements, Encroachments and Survey/Boundary Disputes
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Clearing Title for Defects Due to Easements, Encroachments and Survey/Boundary Disputes Identifying and Resolving Common Title Defects to Ensure
More informationEASEMENTS - INSURING
EASEMENTS - INSURING I. If the easement has been insured previously by the Company, skip to step VII. II. III. Consider an additional premium for the easement examination. SCHEDULE A - Verify that the
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL REAL PROPERTY DIVISION
PENNDOT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL REAL PROPERTY DIVISION POST OFFICE Box 8212 HARRISBURG, PA 17105-8212 TELEPHONE: (717) 787-3128 FACSIMILE: (717)
More informationNo. 102,084 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. JOHN O. GILMAN, et al., Appellants/Cross-appellees,
No. 102,084 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS JOHN O. GILMAN, et al., Appellants/Cross-appellees, v. GERARD BLOCKS, et al., Appellees/Cross-appellants. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. The interpretation
More informationTanglewood Prop. Owners' Ass'n v. Isenhour. Opinion
Tanglewood Prop. Owners' Ass'n v. Isenhour Court of Appeals of North Carolina June 7, 2017, Heard in the Court of Appeals; August 1, 2017, Filed No. COA17-101 Reporter 2017 N.C. App. LEXIS 631 *; 2017
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS JOHN SCHOENHERR, SHELLEY SCHOENHERR, TIMOTHY SPINA, and ELIZABETH SPINA, UNPUBLISHED November 22, 2002 Plaintiffs-Appellees, v No. 235601 Wayne Circuit Court VERNIER
More informationBLACKSTONE INVESTMENTS LLC
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO 2010 CA 1163 BLACKSTONE INVESTMENTS LLC VERSUS GENE STROTHER AND NELL CURRY STROTHER Judgment Rendered Max 6 2011 I I
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) 2008 Opinion No. 84 ) ) ) ) )
M. DALE BECKSTEAD and GAYLE BECKSTEAD, husband and wife, v. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 33473 2008 Opinion No. 84 Filed: June 17, 2008 Plaintiffs-Counterdefendants- Respondents,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No / Filed April 11, 2012
RANDY OLSEN AND LINDA OLSEN, Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 1-870 / 11-0659 Filed April 11, 2012 ERIC HENNINGS, Trustee of the Trust Agreement of Herthel C. Uhl dated August
More informationSUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 2010 WI 93 CASE NO.: COMPLETE TITLE: Barbara C. Grygiel and Janet M. Nahorn, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Petitioners, v. Monches Fish & Game Club, Inc., Defendant-Respondent, Karl
More information