Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Willow Investment conveyed a tract of land to D. Willow reserved an easement in gross described as AN EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR PURPOSE OF INGRESS AND EGRESS TO STATE ROUTE 33, FIFTY FOOT (50') IN WIDTH ALONG THE ENTIRE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN CONVEYED. P subsequently acquired an adjacent tract and acquired the easement in gross over D's land. P operates a recreational facility on its tract and approximately 30,000 patrons use the easement each year. P filed this action against D, alleging that D erected a barricade across the easement, harassed those trying to use the easement, and blocked drainage through his property in order to flood the easement. P sought a declaratory judgment that it had the exclusive right to use the easement, including the ability to exclude D's use. The commissioner concluded that the easement gave P the exclusive right to grant to anyone it chose the authority to use the easement for ingress and egress, but that the easement was not a grant of a fee. The commissioner found that D, as the owner of the fee, retained the right to use the easement area but could not use it in a manner that interfered with P's rights in the easement. P filed exceptions. The trial court sustained P's exceptions and entered an order declaring that P has the exclusive right to determine who may use the exclusive easement and may exclude the owner of the servient estate, D. D appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co