Legal Opinion

Willow Tex, Inc. v. Dimacopoulos

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 18, 1986PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*964OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, judgment granted declaring that plaintiffs have no easement over defendant’s property, and the complaint otherwise dismissed.

Plaintiff Willow Tex, Inc. and defendant George Dimacopoulos are adjoining landowners, the southern boundary of plaintiff’s property (parcel No. 1) running along the northern boundary of defendant’s (parcel No. 2). Located on parcel No. 1 is a factory building extending to the common boundary, with two sets of fire doors at the boundary line. Use of those doors to reach…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Huggins v. Castle Estates Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
  2. Clark v. . DevoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. Trustees of Freeholders & Commonalty v. JessupNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. Crosdale v. . LaniganNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  5. Willow Tex, Inc. v. DimacopoulosNew York Supreme Court · 1983

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Rodriguez v. WinskiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
  2. Greek Peak, Inc. v. GrodnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  3. Monte v. DiMarcoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  4. Henry v. MalenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  5. State v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

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

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

Powered by the Exa API