Finn v. Williams case brief summary
33 N.E.2d 226 (Ill. 1941)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs claimed that nearest and only available means of access from their land to the highway and to market for livestock and crops was by means of right-of-way over defendant's tract immediately to north. Plaintiffs sought declaration of right-of-way easement of necessity. Lower court rendered decree, adjudicating plaintiffs to be owners of right-of-way easement of necessity over defendant's one hundred acres.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
Decree affirmed on the ground that as plaintiffs' land was entirely surrounded by property of strangers and the land of defendant from which it was severed, therefore a right-of-way easement of necessity was necessarily implied in conveyance.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
33 N.E.2d 226 (Ill. 1941)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed from a decision of
the Circuit Court of Sangamon County (Illinois), which adjudicated
plaintiffs to be owners of a right-of-way easement over defendant's
one hundred acres.CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs claimed that nearest and only available means of access from their land to the highway and to market for livestock and crops was by means of right-of-way over defendant's tract immediately to north. Plaintiffs sought declaration of right-of-way easement of necessity. Lower court rendered decree, adjudicating plaintiffs to be owners of right-of-way easement of necessity over defendant's one hundred acres.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court stated that where an owner of land conveyed a parcel thereof which had no outlet to a highway except over the remaining lands of the grantor or over land of strangers, a way of necessity existed over remaining lands of the grantor.
- As plaintiffs' land was entirely surrounded by property of strangers and land of defendant from which it was originally severed, a right-of-way easement of necessity was necessarily implied in the conveyance severing the two tracts and passed by mesne conveyances to plaintiffs.
CONCLUSION
Decree affirmed on the ground that as plaintiffs' land was entirely surrounded by property of strangers and the land of defendant from which it was severed, therefore a right-of-way easement of necessity was necessarily implied in conveyance.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
No comments:
Post a Comment