Legal Opinion

Matthew Gray and Erik Gray v. Martha Treder, John Muscarelle, Robert Muscarelle, Joseph Muscarelle, III, Anne Herrera, Edward F. Godfrey, Judith C. Godfrey

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided December 21, 2018No. 2018-146PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.

¶ 1. This case centers around plaintiffs' landlocked ninety-acre parcel on Roxbury Mountain. Defendants appeal the trial court's decision following a contested hearing that the plaintiffs' parcel includes an appurtenant easement by necessity that crosses some of defendants' properties. They further contend that the trial court erred in holding that Vermont's Marketable Record Title Act has not extinguished that easement. We do not decide whether an easement by necessity arose in the first place because we conclude that even if it had, the Act would have extinguished it. Accordingly, we…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Langle v. KurkulSupreme Court of Vermont · 1986
  2. Hyde v. Town of JamaicaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
  3. Traders, Inc. v. BartholomewSupreme Court of Vermont · 1983
  4. Dee v. KingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1901
  5. Myers v. LaCasseSupreme Court of Vermont · 2003

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In Re: The 30th County Investigating Grand JurySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API