Edgell v. Divver

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the original purpose for the granting of the easements still existed when expressly granted for use as driveways even though the property had since become zoned for commercial use
• “[t]he general rule is well established that an easement may not be relocated without the consent of the owners of both the dominant and servient estates”
• “[t]he primary restriction placed upon the owner of the dominant estate is that the burden created by the easement upon the servient estate cannot be materially increased, nor may new or additional burdens be imposed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).