Boyd v. BellSouth Telephone Telegraph Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an easement by necessity will be extinguished once the necessity ends
• explaining \[w]hatever easements are created by implication must be determined as of the time of the severance of the ownership of the tracts involved\
• reversing summary judgment and noting that driveway easement to access rear entrance could be reasonable mode of enjoying the building at time of severance
• stating “[r]egardless of whether an easement implied by prior use was originally recognized in a water drainage situation, this does not prevent its application in other circumstances”
• requiring (1) misleading conduct; (2) the misleading party’s intent that the other party rely on the conduct; and (3) the misleading party’s knowledge of the real facts
• finding the necessity element must exist at the time of the severance, and the party claiming the right to an easement must not create the necessity when it would not otherwise exist

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).