Legal Opinion

Dyball v. Lennox

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided May 14, 2004No. Docket 241296PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiffs appeal as of right from an order granting defendant’s motion for summary disposition and dismissing plaintiffs’ claims. On appeal, plaintiffs argue that the trial court erred because defendant’s easement should be strictly construed as an easement for ingress and egress, and not for other activity. We reverse and remand.

The Crane family owned a section of the land abutting Lake Fenton. The easement in question was originally created in a September 1955 deed from Edith Crane to George Crane, which provided in relevant part, “The Easterly 16 feet of the above-described premises being…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hilt v. WeberMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Thompson v. EnzMichigan Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Thies v. HowlandMichigan Supreme Court · 1986
  4. McCardel v. SmolenMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Delaney v. PondMichigan Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Wiggins v. City of BurtonMichigan Court of Appeals · 2011
  2. Apsey v. Memorial HospitalMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. Holton v. WardMichigan Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation v. Nestlé Waters North America IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. Hicks v. Epi Printers, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 2005

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