Cleve v. Nairin

How courts have described this case

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

• “There is no dissent from the rule that an easement for the benefit of a particular piece of land cannot be enlarged and extended to other parcels of land, whether adjoining or distinct tracts to which the right is not attached.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Brown v. Voss
  Washington Supreme Court· 1986-03-06· cited 66×
• Penn Bowling Recreation Center, Inc. v. Hot Shoppes, Inc.
  D.C. Circuit· 1949-12-27· cited 40×
• Howard v. Long
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1931-05-12· cited 11×
• Valenzuela v. Sellers
  Supreme Court of Alabama· 1949-02-24· cited 10×
• McBrayer v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1957-09-20· cited 8×
• Plunkett v. Weddington
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1958-12-12· cited 7×
• Kircheimer v. Carrier
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 2014-10-23· cited 4×
• Galloway v. Kelley
  Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)· 1926-06-25· cited 3×
• Acequia Compound Owners' Ass'n v. Orchard Metal Corp.
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 2022-09-21