Legal Opinion

Blaisdell v. Raab

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided March 8, 1990No. 88-329PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThayer, J.

The plaintiffs, George and Albert Blaisdell, appeal a decision of the Superior Court {Perkins, J.) that they are not entitled to an easement by implication, and that the defendants, Arthur and Rita Raab, granted them merely a revocable license to use the roadway across the defendants’ land to reach adjacent property owned by the plaintiffs. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

The defendants were the owners of a large parcel of land located on Portland Street in Rochester. In 1977, the defendants subdivided their property into two separate parcels: a 34,680-square-foot lot with frontage on…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. ChaissonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
  2. Locke Lake Colony Ass'n v. Town of BarnsteadSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
  3. Morton v. StateSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1962
  4. Ryan v. Perini Power Constructors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1985
  5. Elliott v. FergusonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1962

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Soukup v. BrooksSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009
  2. Choquette v. RoySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2015
  3. Paul Lynn & a. v. Wentworth By The Sea Master AssociationSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2016
  4. Evelyn Rivera v. Jimmy Ducharme et al.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2023
  5. Edward E. Favart v. Steven M. Ouellette & a.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2020

1 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