For Your Data Hurst V. Bakery Example Brief

Hurst v. Baker example brief summary
1997 WL 215767 (1997)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Appellant landowners sought review of the determination of the Common Pleas Court of Gallia County (Ohio), which constitute inwards favor of appellee landowners, on their counterclaim to placidity championship to holding claimed past times appellants.

CASE FACTS
The example involved a dispute over a roadway past times contiguous holding owners. Both the roadway, too the properties appurtenant thereto, were originally business office of a much greater tract of province acquired past times a mutual championship holder to a greater extent than than lxxx years ago. Appellants commenced an activity asserting a fee uncomplicated involvement inwards the roadway. Appellees filed a counterclaim asserting a fee uncomplicated involvement to the disputed roadway.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The case courtroom constitute inwards favor of appellees too appellants sought review.

DISCUSSION

• The courtroom constitute that the example was governed past times the master copy deed, which conveyed a fee uncomplicated involvement inwards the 40-acre tract. 
• The courtroom constitute that the linguistic communication of the deed was sufficiently clear to attain upward one's heed that a fee involvement to the disputed roadway was conveyed to the master copy grantee too continued inwards the chain of championship downwards to appellants. 
• The courtroom held that the case courtroom erred inwards its ruling that appellants had exclusively an easement to purpose this route too that the fee involvement therein belonged to appellees.

CONCLUSION
The courtroom reversed the judgment of the case courtroom too remanded the example for grooming of an entry showing that appellants were the fee uncomplicated owners of the roadway.

Suggested police pull schoolhouse report materials

Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.

Share this post