 |
studentJD |
|
|
Students Helping Students |
Currently Briefing & Updating |
|
Student Case Briefs, Outlines, Notes and Sample Tests
Terms & Conditions
© 2010 No content replication for monetary use of any kind is allowed without express written permission. In accordance with UCC § 2-316, this product is provided with "no warranties,either express or implied." The information contained is provided "as-is", with "no guarantee of merchantability." |
|
|
Mueller v. Hoblyn, 887 P.2d 500 |
Supreme Court of Wyoming |
1994 |
|
Chapter |
21 |
Title |
Express Easements |
|
Page |
414 |
Topic |
Termination & Extinguishment |
|
Quick Notes |
The easement was not used for 27 years. The servient estate put up a fence across the easement and grew crop on the easement. In addition, he drill a water well on the easement. |
||
|
Book Name |
Fundamentals of Modern Property Law: Rabin; Kwall, Kwall. ISBN: 978-1-59941-053-1. |
||
|
Issue |
o Whether 27 years of easement nonuse can be terminated by abandonment? No. o Whether putting up a fence, growing crops and drilling a well will terminated an easement that has never been used? No. |
|
Procedure |
|
|
District |
o Portion of landed terminated by adverse possession. |
|
Supreme |
o No portion of the easement granted by the Englemans was terminated by adverse possession. o The easement has never been developed through use. |
|
T-Analysis |
||
|
Type |
Fee (Servient Estate) |
Easement (Dominant Estate) |
|
Party |
Mueller |
Hoblyn |
|
Evidence |
o You did not use the land for 27 years, therefore you abandoned the easement. o Abandonment of an easement requires an intentional relinquishment indicated by conduct which discloses the intention to surrender the right to use the land authorized by the easement. |
o An easement is not extinguished because of non use of the land. Abandonment Rule More than simple nonuse, no matter now long o Abandonment requires more than simple nonuse of an easement, no matter how long the period of nonuse. Abandonment Rule Requires Affirmative and unequivocal Acts o A claim of abandonment can be upheld only where nonuse is accompanied by affirmative and unequivocal acts indicative of an intent to abandon and is inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement." |
|
|
o Building a water well |
o This is not inconsistent with easement purpose. Plus it did not interfere with use of the easement. |
|
|
o Constructing a fence and growing drops. |
o This is not inconsistent with easement purpose |
|
|
o The Englemans/REB easement grant was not definite. |
o The Englemans granted an easement to REB. |
|
|
o The degree of burden would substantially effected the ability to grow crops.
|
o REB Subdivided the land Restatement of Property, supra, 488. o The fact that the dominant estate is divided and a portion or portions conveyed away does not, in and of itself, mean that an additional burden is imposed upon the servient estate. o The result may be that the degree of burden is increased, but that is not sufficient to deny use of the right of way to an owner of a portion so conveyed. |
|
|
o By Mueller constructing a fence plus growing crops on the easement was inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement. o Mueller relied on this knowledge, the Hoblyn new of the fence and the Ag cultivation was obstructing the easement. o Hoblyn should have reasonably foreseen Mueller Ag costs. o To move the Ag cultivation would be extremely damaging. |
Easement Terminated by Estoppel o An easement is extinguished when action is taken by the owner of the servient tenement inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement, if o (a) such action is taken in reasonable reliance upon conduct of the owner of the easement; and
o (b) the owner of the easement might reasonably have foreseen such reliance and the consequent action; and
o (c) the restoration of the privilege of use authorized by the easement would cause unreasonable harm to the owner of the servient tenement. |
|
|
Adverse Possession Rule o An easement is extinguished by a use of the servient tenement by the possessor of it which would be privileged if, and only if, the easement did not exist, provided o (a) the use is adverse as to the owner of the easement and
o (b) the adverse use is, for the period of prescription, continuous and uninterrupted. o Mueller used the easement as if it did not exist. o For a period of 27 years Muellers usage was continuous and uninterrupted. |
o Mueller was permitted to make use of his land until the owners of the dominant estates requested to use the easement. o Mueller's actions were nothing more than an exercise of his right as the landowner to use and develop his property. o |
|
Facts |
Discussion |
Reasoning |
Rules |
|
Pl Mueller Df Hoblyn
Description o The property in dispute was originally a single undivided tract of land owned by the Englemans. Englemans Conveyed to REB o Englemans conveyed a parcel of the land to REB. o An easement to Yellowstone Road was in the conveyance. (No particular description) Englemans Transferred remaining land to Mueller o Expressly mentioning the easement, Subject to easements of record. REB Subdivided land to Refiors o Transferred all rights including easements with particularity. REB sold remaining land to Johnson o Transferred right to use easement with particularity.
Refiors conveyed to Coffee
Johnson Conveyed to Hoblyn
What Happened? o The easement was not used for 27 years. o The servient estate put up a fence across the easement and grew crop on the easement. o In addition, he drill a water well on the easement. Survey o Coffee had the land surveyed, and the only small portions of the dirt driveway corresponded to the easement. 1990 Request to use dirt driveway o Both Coffee and Hoblyn requested to use easement and were DENIED. Quiet Title Action o Hoblyn bought a quiet title action. Counter claim o Mueller District Court o Mueller terminated a 200 foot long parcel of the easement by drilling a well. Supreme Court o No parcels of land was terminated by adverse possession.
|
Restatement of Property, supra, at 450 cmt. c. o The owner of the servient estate retains all rights to the property except as limited by the easement. o The fee or leasehold owner of the land to which an easement applies retains all the incidents of ownership in the land that do not contradict the particular rights of the easement holder. o Thus if the easement holder has the right to cross over the land of another at a certain point, the owner of the underlying property ordinarily has the right to use the exact same part of the property in any way that does not prevent the easement holder from the actions which the easement grants.
Muellers Admits o From 1963 to 1990, all parties believed that the location of the dirt driveway corresponded to the easement the Englemans granted REB.
Mueller Fence prevented use of the o Mueller maintains that his boundary fencing, agricultural use of the servient estate and drilling of a water well have prevented use of the easement.
Mueller District Court Erred o Mueller argues the district court erred in finding that the rights of the owners of the dominant estates to use only a portion of the easement had been terminated by adverse possession. o Instead, Mueller asserts that the entire easement has been extinguished under one of several alternative theories.
Coffee and Hoblyn Rights not terminated o Their rights could not terminate until they made a demand upon Mueller to use the land. o District courted erred in finding that a portion of the easement had been terminated by adverse possession.
Supreme Court Not Terminated by operation of law.
Englemans granted easement to REB o In 1963, the Englemans granted an easement to REB for access to their parcel of land by a private road. o The Englemans' parcel of land became the servient estate, burdened by the easement. The REB property became the dominant estate, benefitted by the easement.
Mueller purchased from Englemans (He had notice) o He took with record notice of the existence of the easement
REB Subdivided Land
Restatement of Property, supra, 488. o The fact that the dominant estate is divided and a portion or portions conveyed away does not, in and of itself, mean that an additional burden is imposed upon the servient estate. o The result may be that the degree of burden is increased, but that is not sufficient to deny use of the right of way to an owner of a portion so conveyed.
Court Unlimited use, No Additional Burden, Degree increased o The easement granted by the Englemans provided for unlimited use for ingress and egress. o Subdivision did not create an additional burden on the easement since the use remained the same. o We hold that while the degree of the burden was increased, the easement was not terminated when REB subdivided its parcel of land.
-----------------------------Topic: Abandonment---------------------------------- Abandonment Rule o Easements may be terminated by abandonment. o Abandonment occurs when one person relinquishes or surrenders rights or property to another. o Abandonment of an easement requires an intentional relinquishment indicated by conduct which discloses the intention to surrender the right to use the land authorized by the easement.
Court No evidence of intentional relinquishment Example o There is no evidence the owners of the dominant estates ever constructed any permanent buildings or structures to obstruct the route of the easement onto their lands.
Mueller Use should have been terminated.
Court - Disagrees
Abandonment Rule More than simple nonuse, no matter now long o Abandonment requires more than simple nonuse of an easement, no matter how long the period of nonuse.
In Harrison v. State Highways and Transp. Com'n, o The court found an easement to remove fill dirt for use in highway construction was not abandoned even though it had not been used in twenty-four years.
Question of Abandonment o The question of abandonment is largely one of intention, and intention to abandon must be proved and it may be inferred only from strong and convincing evidence.
Richards Asphalt Co. v. Bunge Corp (Railroad, 16 uses of fill dirt to control flooding) o The court determined that an easement for a railroad spur was not abandoned despite nonuse for sixteen years. o The owner of the dominant estate had obstructed the railroad tracks with four to seven feet of fill dirt to control periodic flooding. Id. at 190. o The court found that placing the fill dirt and leaving it for sixteen years did not disclose a permanent intent to abandon the easement. Abandonment Rule Requires Affirmative and unequivocal Acts o A claim of abandonment can be upheld only where nonuse is accompanied by affirmative and unequivocal acts indicative of an intent to abandon and is inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement."
Court Coffee, Hoblyns non-use o Did not attempt to use the easement for 27 years. o The mere nonuse of the easement did not disclose an affirmative an unequivocal intent to abandon the easement.
Rule - Alternative Route Used Does Not Extinguish Easement o The use of an alternative access route from 1963 to 1990 also does not establish an intent to abandon the easement. In Jackvony v. Poncelet o The owner of the dominant estate had two available routes to access his property. o The court determined that despite the fact the alternative route was more convenient, the owner of the dominant estate retained the right to use and enjoy an easement giving him access to another route. o The court reiterated that abandonment would only be found when there is an expression of an intent to abandon the easement.
Court Coffee and Hoblyn did not abandon the easement granted by the Englemans.
-----------------------------Topic: Detrimental reliance---------------------------------- o Detrimental reliance on the conduct of the owners of a dominant estate may also result in a termination of the easement. o Restatement of Property, supra, at 505 acknowledges that the owner of a servient estate may seek to terminate an easement by Estoppel:
Easement Terminated by Estoppel o An easement is extinguished when action is taken by the owner of the servient tenement inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement, if o (a) such action is taken in reasonable reliance upon conduct of the owner of the easement; and
o (b) the owner of the easement might reasonably have foreseen such reliance and the consequent action; and
o (c) the restoration of the privilege of use authorized by the easement would cause unreasonable harm to the owner of the servient tenement.
Court Mueller failed to make showing o Mueller failed to make any showing of conduct by Coffee, Hoblyn or their predecessors-in-interest that he reasonably relied upon to his detriment. o We hold that the easement was not terminated by estoppel.
-----------------------------Topic: Adverse Possession----------------------------------
Adverse Possession Rule o An easement is extinguished by a use of the servient tenement by the possessor of it which would be privileged if, and only if, the easement did not exist, provided o (a) the use is adverse as to the owner of the easement and
o (b) the adverse use is, for the period of prescription, continuous and uninterrupted.
Court Adverse Possession Elements o The party claiming adverse possession must show actual, open, notorious, exclusive and hostile possession of another's property for ten years under a claim of right or color of title.
Adverse Possession: Distinguish between land and easement o The owner of the servient estate claiming adverse possession of an easement already has the right to possess and use the land so long as that use is not inconsistent with the easement. o Therefore, the owner of a servient estate must prove the use of the servient estate made during the period of adverse possession is sufficiently hostile and inconsistent with the use permitted by the easement.
Adverse Possession: Extinguish Easement o To extinguish an easement over (or use of) the servient tenements, the servient tenement owner must demonstrate a visible, notorious and continuous adverse and hostile use of said land which is inconsistent with the use made and rights held by the easement holder, not merely possession which is inconsistent with another's claim of title.
District Court Water Well o Was adverse for 200 foot portion of easement
District Court Boundary Fence Agriculture o No sufficient to terminate easement.
Mueller Arg Entire Not Only o He believes the well terminated the entire easement by adverse possession.
Coffee and Hobbes Counter Arg (No Adverse Possession) o Mueller's actions prior to 1990 were not adverse to their interests because Mueller was permitted to make use of his land until the owners of the dominant estates requested to use the easement. o Mueller's actions were nothing more than an exercise of his right as the landowner to use and develop his property.
Court Did not terminate ANY portion of the easement by Adverse Possession
Example Not Adverse Possession (Easement Never Been Used) o Covering easement with improvements when easement is not in use. o Constructing a fence across an unused easement. o Placing 6 trees down the center of the easement used as a private road. Also, constructing a fence inside the easement boundary, building a concrete irrigation on the other side of the easement, and place two large boulders on the easement. o Fencing, trees and gardens.
Non-Use, Fence, Demand Rule o Where an easement has been created but no occasion has arisen for its use, the owner of the servient tenement may fence his land and such use will NOT be deemed adverse to the existence of the easement UNTIL such time as 1. The need for the right of way arises, 2. A demand is made by the owner of the dominant tenement that the easement be opened and 3. The owner of the servient tenement refuses to do so.
Exceptions o When easement is not definitively located. o When easement is not developed through use. o The easement owner if given notice either when the easement is made open OR the easement owner demands it to be open.
Court Holding o No portion of the easement granted by the Englemans was terminated by adverse possession. o The easement has never been developed through use. Put on Notice o When Coffee and Hoblyn demanded use, they were put on notice in 1990. Muellers Prior 1990 Use and Agricultural Use o His use of the land was not inconsistent with the purpose reserved for the easement. Water Well o Not adverse to the continued existence of this previously used easement.
DISSENT o Fencing + Cultivation results in gaining title in FEE by adverse possession.
|
||
|
Rules |
|
Restatement of Property, supra, 488. o The fact that the dominant estate is divided and a portion or portions conveyed away does not, in and of itself, mean that an additional burden is imposed upon the servient estate. o The result may be that the degree of burden is increased, but that is not sufficient to deny use of the right of way to an owner of a portion so conveyed.
Abandonment Rule o Easements may be terminated by abandonment. o Abandonment occurs when one person relinquishes or surrenders rights or property to another. o Abandonment of an easement requires an intentional relinquishment indicated by conduct which discloses the intention to surrender the right to use the land authorized by the easement.
Abandonment Rule More than simple nonuse, no matter now long o Abandonment requires more than simple nonuse of an easement, no matter how long the period of nonuse.
Abandonment Rule More than simple nonuse, no matter now long o Abandonment requires more than simple nonuse of an easement, no matter how long the period of nonuse.
Question of Abandonment o The question of abandonment is largely one of intention, and intention to abandon must be proved and it may be inferred only from strong and convincing evidence.
Abandonment Rule Requires Affirmative and unequivocal Acts o A claim of abandonment can be upheld only where nonuse is accompanied by affirmative and unequivocal acts indicative of an intent to abandon and is inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement."
Rule - Alternative Route Used Does Not Extinguish Easement o The use of an alternative access route from 1963 to 1990 also does not establish an intent to abandon the easement.
Easement Terminated by Estoppel o An easement is extinguished when action is taken by the owner of the servient tenement inconsistent with the continued existence of the easement, if o (a) such action is taken in reasonable reliance upon conduct of the owner of the easement; and
o (b) the owner of the easement might reasonably have foreseen such reliance and the consequent action; and
o (c) the restoration of the privilege of use authorized by the easement would cause unreasonable harm to the owner of the servient tenement.
Adverse Possession Rule o An easement is extinguished by a use of the servient tenement by the possessor of it which would be privileged if, and only if, the easement did not exist, provided o (a) the use is adverse as to the owner of the easement and
o (b) the adverse use is, for the period of prescription, continuous and uninterrupted.
Adverse Possession: Distinguish between land and easement o The owner of the servient estate claiming adverse possession of an easement already has the right to possess and use the land so long as that use is not inconsistent with the easement. o Therefore, the owner of a servient estate must prove the use of the servient estate made during the period of adverse possession is sufficiently hostile and inconsistent with the use permitted by the easement.
Adverse Possession: Extinguish Easement o To extinguish an easement over (or use of) the servient tenements, the servient tenement owner must demonstrate a visible, notorious and continuous adverse and hostile use of said land which is inconsistent with the use made and rights held by the easement holder, not merely possession which is inconsistent with another's claim of title.
Non-Use, Fence, Demand Rule o Where an easement has been created but no occasion has arisen for its use, the owner of the servient tenement may fence his land and such use will NOT be deemed adverse to the existence of the easement UNTIL such time as 4. The need for the right of way arises, 5. A demand is made by the owner of the dominant tenement that the easement be opened and 6. The owner of the servient tenement refuses to do so.
Exceptions o When easement is not definitively located. o When easement is not developed through use. o The easement owner if given notice either when the easement is made open OR the easement owner demands it to be open.
|
|
Class Notes |
|
|