HURST V. BAKER
1997 WL 215767 (1997)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a dispute over a roadway contiguous to property owners that
used to be part of the same tract of land.
FACTS: A 94-acre parcel of land existed and eventually was split in two with a deed of 40
of the acres to a William A Lowks. Lowks died intestate nine years after the grant. The
heirs then sold the parcel to Haynes with the same description of the land as the original
deed to Lowks contained. Haynes then sold to Burton but a different description of the land
was used; an open roadway in common. This new description, 'a roadway in common,' was used
in all further conveyances of the property including its acquisition by Hurst (P) in 1981.
The rest of the property was described as what was left of the original tract excepting the
40 acres and road. That property was conveyed to Baker and in 1967 a new legal description
was used; 'a roadway 20 feet in width' was excepted from the conveyance. P sued Baker (D)
asserting that they were the fee simple owners of the roadway. The trial court gave the
verdict to P determining that the initial deed from the Lowks only gave an easement. The
trial court also ruled that the easement was nonexclusive and could be used in common by
both parties. Ps were adjudged to have responsibility for maintenance and were instructed
not to farm their property in any manner which would interfere with the ingress or egress of
the back forty-acre tract. P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment