D'ABBRACCI v. Shaw-Bastian

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to credit a utility company expert’s testimony where his “calculations and estimates were imprecise and speculative”
• claim for injunctive relief for interference with easement rights is equitable in nature and reviewed de novo
• \[T]he dominant estate holder's right to use the easement is limited to what is reasonably necessary to accomplish the intended purpose of the easement.\
• “Ordinarily, we defer to a trial court’s credibility findings that are based on that court’s superior opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses.”
• metes and bounds easement in and of itself did not limit servient estate owner’s reasonable use of his land
• whether a servient owner’s actions constitute substantial interference is a question of fact; the nature of the relief sought generally determines whether a claim is an action at law or in equity and thus determines the standard of review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).