Dickinson v. Pake
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HUSKINS, Justice.
Development of the law in North Carolina with respect to acquisition of prescriptive easements has followed a tortuous route — roundabout and bent in different directions.
Coke states that at common law a long, continuous and peaceable user was necessary to establish a prescriptive right. Coke on Littleton § 113B. However, most American courts have sought to equate acquisition of prescriptive easements to acquisition of title by adverse possession so that it is generally held that prescriptive acquisition requires open, exclusive, continuous, uninterrupted, adverse user under…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Summey v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Snowden v. . BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Dulin Ex Rel. Dulin v. FairesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by175 opinions
- Poor v. HillCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- North Carolina National Bank v. BurnetteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Bryant v. Nationwide Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- State v. WitherspoonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Penley v. PenleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
170 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.