Connolly v. Trabue
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HAERLE, Acting P. J.—
I. INTRODUCTION
This case involves the issue of whether a prescriptive easement was acquired by plaintiffs and appellants Connolly (the Connollys) across adjacent real property owned by defendants and respondents Trabue (the Trabues) in a rural portion of southern Humboldt County. After a bench trial lasting approximately two weeks, the trial court ruled that, even if such an easement had been acquired by the Connollys, their claim to the right to use such was barred by the doctrine of laches because they had delayed in asserting their claimed prescriptive easement…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Gerhard v. StephensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Lubin v. LubinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Muktarian v. BarmbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Vieira Enterprises, Inc. v. McCoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Blaser v. Cal. State Teachers' Retirement SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- Howard v. Tanium, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2022
- Humboldt County Adult Protective Services v. Superior Court of Humboldt CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Jose R. Solano v. PHH Mortgage CompanyDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2025
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.