Legal Opinion

Schumacher v. Department of Natural Resources

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided August 29, 2007No. Docket 266524PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Per curiam

This equitable action concerning the scope of an easement is before us after remand to the trial court. See Schumacher v Dep’t of Natural Resources, 256 Mich App 103; 663 NW2d 921 (2003) (Schumacher I). Defendant appeals as of right from the trial court’s order on remand granting plaintiff an easement by necessity for ingress and egress and ruling that the scope of the easement will be determined by local ordinances. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

In the first appeal, Schumacher I, the parties cross-appealed the trial court’s order granting an easement by necessity to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Grievance Administrator v. LopatinMichigan Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Chapdelaine v. SochockiMichigan Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. Blackhawk Development Corp. v. Village of DexterMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Department of Natural Resources v. Carmody-Lahti Real Estate, IncMichigan Supreme Court · 2005
  5. City of Kalamazoo v. Department of CorrectionsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1998

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Augustine v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. Duncan v. StateMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. Charles A. Murray Trust v. FutrellMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
  4. People v. BryantMichigan Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Sharp v. DowneyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010

30 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