Legal Opinion
Umhau v. Bazzuro
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided November 23, 1942No. 8062PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VINSON, Associate Justice.
The appellants are contending that the District Court erred in denying them a prescriptive easement over the appellees’ land. As a result of the proceedings on a motion ancillary to this appeal, the parties have agreed to stand on the factual findings of the District Court. The appellants maintain that their position is sustained, as a matter of law, by those findings. We are accordingly limited in our inquiry to their legal consequences.
Prior to 1919, appellants’ father and predecessor in title was the owner of certain land extending between Sherman Avenue and Ninth…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Holmes v. Turner's Falls Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Deregibus v. Silberman Furniture Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
- Doswell v. De La LanzaSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Capps v. MerrifieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1924
- Rose v. City of FarmingtonIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Sanders v. WorthingtonTexas Supreme Court · 1964
- Kogod v. CogitoCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- Chaconas v. MeyersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- James Thomas Martin v. Noel L. BicknellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- Estate of Wells v. Estate of SmithDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.