Depner v. United States National Bank
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
Respondents assert they have acquired an easement of light and air over the premises west of the hotel, but make no claim of an implied covenant for quiet enjoyment. They rest entirely on their claim to an express grant of an easement to the light and air over the premises on the west side of the hotel building.
Easements of light and air over adjacent premises are not favored. Miller v. Hoeschler, 126 Wis. 263, 105 N. W. 790. The accepted doctrine is that they are not created or acquired by prescription. It seems plain that such an easement cannot exist by “implication from necessity” in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Miller v. HoeschlerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- Fischer v. LaackWisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by8 opinions
- Prah v. MarettiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- Johnson v. Prange-Geussenhainer Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1942
- Algrem v. NowlanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Cernohorsky v. Northern Liquid Gas Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1955
- State Ex Rel. Siciliano v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.