Luminais v. O.R.S.T. Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a deed granting a right-of-way to a particular person was not enforceable as an easement appurtenant to one of his two nearby properties because the deed did not specify which of those properties was to have benefitted [benefited] from the right-of-way
• holding that a deed granting a right-of-way to a particular person was not enforceable as an easement appurtenant to one of his two nearby properties because the deed did not specify which of those properties was to have benefitted [benefited] from the right-of-way
• noting that both dominant and servient estates must be identified to create easement appurtenant
• defendant asserting right-of-way as special defense to plaintiffs quiet title action had burden of proving all facts necessary to prove defense
• trial court should follow appellate court precedent, as it is the appellate courts' prerogative, not the trial court's, to change the law
• “In order to create a right-of-way as an appurtenance to the dominant estate, both the dominant and servient estates must be identified.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).