Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Landowner Establishes Likelihood of Success on Implied Easement Claims
XXXX, L.P. v. 363 Prospect Place, LLC
NYLJ 8/4/17, p. 29, col. 6
AppDiv, Second Dept.
(memorandum opinion)
In landowner's action for a judgment that it holds an easement over neighbor's property, neighbor appealed from Supreme Court's grant of a preliminary injunction, and from Supreme Court's denial of neighbor's motion to dismiss the complaint. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the evidence proffered by neighbor did not conclusively establish that landowner had no easement by necessity, pre-existing use, or prescription.
Landowner and neighbor own abutting lots in Brooklyn. The two lots originally formed a single parcel with a common driveway. When the lots were separated, a portion of the driveway was located on each of the lots. Landowner acquired its parcel in 1998, and has used the driveway to access a service area and parking area on its premises. In 2012, when neighbor acquired the abutting parcel, it began construction of a residential building. Construction impeded access to a portion of the driveway, and neighbor apparently planned to remove a portion of the driveway to install a yard for residents. Landowner then brought this action to enjoin blockage of the driveway, asserting easements by necessity, pre-existing use, and prescription. Supreme Court granted landowner's motion for a preliminary injunction, and denied neighbor's motion to dismiss. Neighbor appealed.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.