Legal Opinion

MacCaskill v. Ebbert

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided June 10, 1987No. 16377PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUBSTITUTE OPINION UPON DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING

This opinion supersedes the Court’s prior opinion dated December 31, 1986.

BURNETT, Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment rejecting a claim of easement by necessity to “landlocked” property. Such an easement customarily arises where part of a tract is conveyed and, as a result of the severance, the part conveyed or the part retained is deprived of legal access to a public road. Cordwell v. Smith, 105 Idaho 71, 665 P.2d 1081 (Ct.App.1983). The question presented in this case is whether an easement by necessity might also arise…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. State Highway Commission v. DealOregon Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Bob Daniels and Sons v. WeaverIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. Martino v. FleenorSupreme Court of Colorado · 1961
  4. Close v. RensinkIdaho Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Brasington v. WilliamsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hughes v. George B. Fisher, LLCIdaho Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Owens v. BrownlieSupreme Court of Iowa · 2000
  3. Brace v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  4. Visser v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. Cirelli v. EntDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004

10 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