Legal Opinion

Chicoine v. Davis

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 25, 2017No. 28114PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeverson, Justice

[1Í1.] Noel and Teresa Chicoine (the Chi-coines) commenced this action asking that the circuit court declare that they have an access easement across Mineral Survey 1758 (M.S. 1758) into the adjoining Mineral Survey 1794. The circuit court found that no easement exists, either by grant or prescription. The Chicoines appeal the circuit court’s determination, asserting that a public right-of-way exists across M.S. 1758 by grant. They do not appeal the denial of a prescriptive easement. We affirm.

Background

[¶2.] The Chicoine own real property within M.S. 1794 (a/k/a Clondyke subdivision). The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Knight v. MadisonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  2. J.K. Dean, Inc. v. KSD, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Tripp v. F & K ASSAM FAMILY, LLCSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Busselman v. EggeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In Re Dennis Snaza Family TrustSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
  2. Turgeon v. City of SpearfishSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API