Legal Opinion

Nicholls v. Healy

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided December 6, 1971No. Docket 10224PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtR. B. Burns, P. J.

The basic issue in this case is whether defendants’ evidence at trial level was sufficient to extinguish plaintiffs’ easement on the theory of adverse possession.

Plaintiffs’ five-foot-wide easement was created by a deed and runs over the defendants’ property. The trial court eliminated plaintiffs’ rights of passage over the easement but preserved their right to construct and maintain a waterline.

In Michigan use of an easement by the owner of the servient estate will not ripen into adverse possession unless such use is inconsistent with the easement. Greve v. Caron (1925), 233 Mich 261; Harr…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Greve v. CaronMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Martin v. ArndtMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Harr v. CoolbaughMichigan Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Nicholls v. HealyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1969

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Knight v. MadisonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Beach v. Lima TownshipMichigan Court of Appeals · 2009
  3. Hall v. ClaytonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1980
  4. Matoush v. LovingoodColorado Court of Appeals · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API