Legal Opinion

PENROSE v. McCULLOUGH

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided November 18, 2014No. Docket 316435PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendants Todd Sanford and Amy Sanford appeal as of right an order granting summary disposition in favor of plaintiff, Anthony Penrose, in this property easement dispute. Because plaintiff possessed an exclusive easement over the property in question, the Sanfords’ later acquisition of an easement over that same property was ineffective, and we affirm.

I. BASIC FACTS

This case arises out of a dispute over real property located in the Monroe Park Subdivision, in the city of South Haven. Lots 9, 10, and 11 were originally owned by William and Susan Gleeson. The Gleesons sold Lot 11 to defendants…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Corley v. Detroit Board of EducationMichigan Supreme Court · 2004
  2. McCoig Materials, LLC v. Galui Construction, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2012
  3. Anzaldua v. Neogen Corp.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Richards v. TibaldiMichigan Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. Schadewald v. BruleMichigan Court of Appeals · 1997

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Batianis v. Dundee, Village ofDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2022
  2. Carol Costello v. Indn LLCMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019
  3. Cotel LLC v. Comcast of michigan/mississippi/tennessee IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019
  4. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Andrew HargreavesMichigan Court of Appeals · 2020
  5. Frank Kovalic v. Department of TreasuryMichigan Court of Appeals · 2019

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API