Roy (P) acquired land which was landlocked. P instituted a proceeding requesting the court to declare the existence of a right of way of necessity over Euro Holland's (D) land. The trial court ruled in favor of D, denying P's claim on the basis that P had not proven unity of title in a common source and the reasonable necessity for such an easement for the beneficial use and enjoyment of the property. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.