Legal Opinion

Lawson v. Hill

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided October 30, 1979No. 78-152PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woodward

Defendants, William and Dianne Hill, appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff, David Lawson, following a bench trial, establishing an easement of necessity by implication across the defendants’ land in favor of the plaintiff and establishing an easement by prescription across defendants’ land in favor of plaintiff. Plaintiff cross-appeals from those portions of the judgment which denied him a bill to quiet title, refused to allow reformation of the deed between defendants and third parties, denied him money damages, and allowed the defendants the option of relocating the easement…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Blazina v. BlazinaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1976
  2. Powers v. SturmAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
  3. Roller v. Logan Landfill, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1974
  4. Stevenson v. MastonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1969
  5. Baylor v. ThiessAppellate Court of Illinois · 1971

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Warren v. LeMayAppellate Court of Illinois · 1986
  2. Pietka v. Chelco Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1982
  3. Ryan v. Mobil Oil Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1987
  4. Cross v. Ainsworth Seed Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1990
  5. Grimming v. Alton & Southern Railway Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1990

21 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