Henderson v. La Capra
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
MAUGHMER, Commissioner.
Plaintiffs (appellants) seek to establish an easement over that portion of a concrete driveway which is located on the property of defendant (respondent). Plaintiffs base their alleged entitlement first, on an easement by implication, and, second, by prescription. After hearing the testimony and weighing the evidence, -the trial court denied an injunction and dismissed plaintiffs’ petition. In the decree it was specifically found: (1) That the driveway was not a “way of necessity” as concerns the real property owned by plaintiffs; (2) that the use of the driveway has…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- McCoy v. McCoySupreme Court of Missouri · 1950
- Jacobs v. BrewsterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1945
- Ogden v. . JenningsNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Rogerson v. ShepherdWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1889
- Riggs v. City of SpringfieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1939
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lacy v. SchmitzMissouri Court of Appeals · 1982
- Causey v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1965
- Stickle v. LinkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
- Holian v. GuentherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1971
- Hillside Development Co. v. FieldsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1996
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.