Simonsen v. Todd

How courts have described this case

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

• finding plaintiffs’ acts were not sufficient to put servient owner on notice that they claimed an easement in the driveway
• noting a claim of right must be shown by evidence independent of the use
• “ ‘There are usually no equities in favor of one who claims property of another by adverse possession and his acts are to be strictly construed.’ ” (Citation omitted.)
• permissive use supports a prescriptive easement only where the claimant has expended substantial amounts of labor or money in reliance upon the owner’s consent or oral agreement to the claimant’s use
• stating Koops’s addition of gravel failed to establish prescriptive easement
• “Even if we assume [the plaintiffs] expended substantial amounts of labor or money to maintain and improve the road [by adding gravel and grading the surface], those expenditures were not ‘in reliance upon the servient owner’s consent or his oral agreement to the use.’” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).