Ward v. Slavecek

466 S.W.2d 91 (Tex. Civ. App. 1971)

 

RULE:

One requirement for engrafting an easement by implication is that the easement must be necessary to the use of the dominant estate, the degree of necessity being "strict necessity."

FACTS:

The trial court rendered a take-nothing judgment in favor of defendant adjacent landowners and concluded that plaintiff landowner did not establish a right to an implied easement over a driveway on defendants' property. On plaintiff’s appeal, the appellate court affirmed.

ISSUE:

Did plaintiff landowner establish a right to an implied easement over the property of defendant adjacent landowners?

ANSWER:

No.

CONCLUSION:

Plaintiff landowner did not establish an implied easement as a matter of law because the easement was not strictly necessary to the use of the dominant estate where there was evidence that plaintiff could access her garage without using defendants' driveway.

Click here to view the full text case and earn your Daily Research Points.