Easement Defined - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 5
About This Presentation
Title:

Easement Defined

Description:

Duration: Either a stated time period or forever (in perpetuity) ... Abandonment. Prescription. Conveyance to Bona Fide Purchaser (BFP) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:211
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 6
Provided by: StephenF8
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Easement Defined


1
Easement Defined
  • Non-possessory interests in realty
  • Negative Easements Solar or wind
  • MO Statute 422.012 No solar easements by
    prescription (must be expressly granted)
  • Affirmative Easements Roads, utilities above
    and below ground, paths
  • Location How wide?
  • Scope For what purposes? Fenced off?
  • Duration Either a stated time period or forever
    (in perpetuity)

2
Creating An Easement
  • Express Grant
  • Express Reservation
  • Implied Grant
  • Implied Reservation
  • Prescription
  • Private Condemnation (Chapter 228.342)
  • Maximum width of 40 feet
  • Must pay fair market value
  • Road location decided by the jury

3
Doctrine of Prescriptive Rights
  • This is a court-made doctrine (common law)
  • Similar to the doctrine of adverse possession
  • Allows a trespasser to acquire rights in land
  • But the rights in land is not complete title,
    but rather an easement to use the land
  • Trespasser must be able to prove in a quiet
    title lawsuit FOUR of the five elements of
    adverse possession
  • Which element of adverse possession is NOT
    required to get an easement across anothers land
    by prescription?
  • Dont have to prove exclusive use (dont have
    to be the only person using the land, i.e., dont
    have to exclude the true owner)

4
Terminating An Easement
  • Express Release Via A Quitclaim Deed
  • Expiration of Stated Duration
  • Abandonment
  • Prescription
  • Conveyance to Bona Fide Purchaser (BFP)
  • Someone who gives value and is without notice
    that someone other than the seller has rights

5
Proffit v. Plymesser (Ohio, 2001)
  • Which of the following is NOT one of the
    arguments made by Plymesser (whose land was
    subject to the road easement)?
  • 1) Unfair to allow Proffitt to buy more land to
    access (more than 100 additional acres) than the
    original 70 acres the easement was granted for
  • 2) That Plymesser had the right of co-possession
    to the road easement land and should be allowed
    to graze his cattle on the easement (so would
    need gates to keep his cattle fenced in)
  • 3) Prior Ohio court decisions allowed putting
    gates across road easements
  • 4) That Proffitt should not be allowed to widen
    the road easement to accommodate modern (wider)
    machinery as the original easement grant was at a
    time when only a narrow farm path was needed
  • 5)  The written easement did not state it was in
    perpetuity (forever)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com