Geismann v. Trish
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Matt. O. Reynolds, Judge. (1) The four essential facts for the plaintiffs to prove in order to sustain their claim to an easement by prescription are: First, user for the prescribed period; second, that the user was adverse; third, that it was under a claim of right.; and fourth, notice to the owner of the user and of its character and the claim of right. 188 Mo. 704. Again plaintiff was not entitled to show under his petition…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Matt. O. Reynolds, Judge. (1) The four essential facts for the plaintiffs to prove in order to sustain their claim to an easement by prescription are: First, user for the prescribed period; second, that the user was adverse; third, that it was under a claim of right.; and fourth, notice to the owner of the user and of its character and the claim of right. 188 Mo. 704. Again plaintiff was not entitled to show under his petition that there was a user for the reason that there was no allegation that the strip was so used and no amendment of the…
1Opinion of the CourtCaulfield, J.
(after stating the facts). — The defendants’ contention, that the reservation was void because indefinite in description of the way intended,, does not meet with our approval. The language used is, “Ten feet of said lot being reserved as a right-way.” It is true that the location of the way could not be determined from a mere reading of the deed. The language used leaves us in doubt as to the real intention of the parties in that respect. But in such circumstances the trial court was at liberty to receive parol evidence showing the situation and conduct of the parties and the state and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gaston v. Gainesville & Dahlonega Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- George v. CoxMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Davis v. WatsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Bernero v. McFarland Real Estate Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Kraut's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lamont Gas & Oil Co. v. Doop & FraterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Bolomey v. HouchinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1950
- Illig v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- O'Brien v. RichterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
- Area Real Estate Associates, Inc. v. City of RaymoreMissouri Court of Appeals · 1985