Elliott v. Ferguson

The fundamental question posed by the agreed facts is whether the plaintiff has a right of way of necessity across the defendant’s land.

The law in this state is in accord with what we consider the more sensible rule that reasonable necessity is required to create a presumption of an implied grant of a way of necessity. See Goudie v. Fisher, 79 N. H. 424, 425; Farmington Library Association v. Trafton, 84 N. H. 29, 31. In support of this rule, see also 28 C.J.S., Easements, s. 35(b); 3 Tiffany, Real Property (3d ed.) s. 794, p. 293. This principle is consistent with the tenor of our law which…