Penn Bowling Recreation
Center, Inc. v. Hot Shoppes, Inc. case brief summary
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
179 F.2d 64
CASE SYNOPSIS: Plaintiff
dominant tenement owner sought review of an order of the United
States district court granting defendant servient tenement owner
summary judgment, in the dominant tenement owner's action to enjoin
the servient tenement owner from maintaining a structure which
blocked an easement over the servient tenement owner's
property.
FACTS: The dominant tenement owner acquired property, which enjoyed an easement over the servient tenement owner's adjoining property. The servient tenement owner argued that the dominant tenement owner forfeited its easement by exceeding the rights associated with the easement. Specifically, the servient tenement owner argued that the dominant tenement owner exceeded the scope of the easement when it used the easement to service adjoining land that was not covered by the easement.
HOLDING:
The court rejected this argument, noting that the creation of an additional burden upon the servient tenement owner's property did not constitute forfeiture of the easement, provided that it was possible to server the increased burden.
ANALYSIS:
The court also rejected the servient tenement owner's argument that the easement was forfeited by the dominant tenement owner's misuse of the easement by parking cars over the easement. While such misuse could be enjoined, it was not evidence of forfeiture. The court concluded that fact questions as to the reasonableness of the enjoyment of the easement, and whether it was possible to sever the burden created by the enlarged use of the easement precluded summary disposition.
CONCLUSION: The court set aside the district court's order granting the servient tenement owner summary judgment, and remanded the matter to the district court for further proceedings.
FACTS: The dominant tenement owner acquired property, which enjoyed an easement over the servient tenement owner's adjoining property. The servient tenement owner argued that the dominant tenement owner forfeited its easement by exceeding the rights associated with the easement. Specifically, the servient tenement owner argued that the dominant tenement owner exceeded the scope of the easement when it used the easement to service adjoining land that was not covered by the easement.
HOLDING:
The court rejected this argument, noting that the creation of an additional burden upon the servient tenement owner's property did not constitute forfeiture of the easement, provided that it was possible to server the increased burden.
ANALYSIS:
The court also rejected the servient tenement owner's argument that the easement was forfeited by the dominant tenement owner's misuse of the easement by parking cars over the easement. While such misuse could be enjoined, it was not evidence of forfeiture. The court concluded that fact questions as to the reasonableness of the enjoyment of the easement, and whether it was possible to sever the burden created by the enlarged use of the easement precluded summary disposition.
CONCLUSION: The court set aside the district court's order granting the servient tenement owner summary judgment, and remanded the matter to the district court for further proceedings.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment