Wagner v. Fairlamb

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a landowner’s right to enforce a private way of necessity over property previously held under unity of title could not be extinguished by laches
• noting that severance of noncontiguous properties is not fatal to recognition of an implied easement
• noting that implied easements are “not expressed by the parties in writing, but ... arise[ ] out of the existence of certain facts implied from the transaction”
• “For the general and modern rule, which we approve, is that a right-of-way may be appurtenant to land even when the servient tenement is not completely adjacent to the dominant.”
• an easement of necessity is implied “where the lands conveyed are without ingress or egress except over lands retained”
• A n easement’s “ scope and type of . . . use, present and future, varies with the necessity. ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).