This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Lindsey v. Clark: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The Clark progeny couple sold their lots with a Clark easement to Lindsey in 1944. The 1944 deed didn't specify any easement! | The Clark progeny couple sold their lots with a Clark easement to Lindsey in 1944. The 1944 deed didn't specify any easement! | ||
|procedural_history=Lindsey sued to enjoin the progenitor Clark couple from using a driveway easement in the Lindsey property acquired from the progeny Clark couple in 1944. | |||
Lindsey loses as the trial court determined that the progeny Clark couples hadn't '''abandoned''' the driveway easement on the Lindsey lots. | |||
|issues=Does a party abandon a deeded easement through dis-use? | |||
|holding='''Abandonment''' of a deeded easement requires non-use + acquiescence to the servient property owner's adverse use for a sufficient time period. | |||
|rule="Use it or lose it" is the maxim related to an abandonment of an [[easement]]; on the other hand, verbally informing the property owner of the plan to not use an easement any longer is '''release'''. | |rule="Use it or lose it" is the maxim related to an abandonment of an [[easement]]; on the other hand, verbally informing the property owner of the plan to not use an easement any longer is '''release'''. | ||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link |
Revision as of 16:23, April 9, 2023
Lindsey v. Clark | |
Court | Virginia Supreme Court |
---|---|
Citation | |
Date decided | March 10, 1952 |
Facts
Floyd Clark owned 4 adjoining lots with his wife Helen. In 1937, the Clark couple conveyed 2 of the adjoining lots to their daughter & her husband.
The Clark progeny couple sold their lots with a Clark easement to Lindsey in 1944. The 1944 deed didn't specify any easement!Procedural History
Lindsey sued to enjoin the progenitor Clark couple from using a driveway easement in the Lindsey property acquired from the progeny Clark couple in 1944.
Lindsey loses as the trial court determined that the progeny Clark couples hadn't abandoned the driveway easement on the Lindsey lots.Issues
Does a party abandon a deeded easement through dis-use?
Holding
Abandonment of a deeded easement requires non-use + acquiescence to the servient property owner's adverse use for a sufficient time period.
Rule
"Use it or lose it" is the maxim related to an abandonment of an easement; on the other hand, verbally informing the property owner of the plan to not use an easement any longer is release.