Legal Opinion
O'Brien v. Coburn
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided September 5, 1995No. 13512PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFreedman, J.
The defendant appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the plaintiffs an easement by implication across a certain driveway owned by the defendant. The defendant argues that the trial court improperly granted the easement by implication because no such action was pleaded in the plaintiffs’ complaint. We agree and accordingly reverse the judgment of the trial court.1
The trial court found the following facts. The plaintiffs own property located at 116 Meetinghouse Hill Road in Durham. The property includes a residential dwelling and attached garage, as well as a one-stoiy concrete…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Normand Josef Enterprises, Inc. v. Connecticut National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Fuessenich v. DiNardoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Beaudoin v. Town Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Lundberg v. KovacsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Swenson v. DittnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Sanders v. DiasConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Constantine v. SchneiderConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
- Michalski v. HinzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
- Hoffman Fuel Co. v. ElliottConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- O'Brien v. CoburnConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.