O'Dell v. Stegall: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |court=West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals |citation=703 S.E.2d 561 |date=November 24, 2010 |subject=Property |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link |link=https://law.justia.com/cases/west-virginia/supreme-court/2010/35488.html |case_text_source=Justia }} }}") |
No edit summary |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|date=November 24, 2010 | |date=November 24, 2010 | ||
|subject=Property | |subject=Property | ||
|facts=*O'Dell = purchaser of a church land in West Virginia re-purposed for residential use | |||
*O'Dell's new property had direct access to a public road through a driveway on the building's south side | |||
*On the north side of O'Dell's property was a gravel lane connected to the aforesaid public road | |||
*Ownership of the gravel lane was unknown | |||
*Stegall = owner of a private property dependent on the gravel lane to access the public road; Stegall's house was to the north of the gravel lane | |||
*Stegall was paying for the upkeep of the gravel lane. | |||
* | |||
* | |||
|procedural_history=* O'Dell sued Stegall & neighbors to the north seeking legal recognition of his prescriptive easement of the gravel lane. | |||
* O'Dell won in the trial court. | |||
* | |||
|issues=* Must land use supporting a prescriptive easement be [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/adverse-possession adverse], continuous, & either | |||
** actually known or | |||
** open & notorious? | |||
|arguments=* O'Dell argued that he had a prescriptive easement over the gravel road because churchgoers had been using the gravel road on the north to access the former church | |||
* Stegall argued that O'Dell's use of the gravel lane was causing wear & tear | |||
* | |||
|holding=Yes. A prescriptive easement can only arise from a use that's adverse, continuous, & either actually known or open & notorious. | |||
|judgment=Reversed | |||
|reasons=Justice Ketchum: None of the parties could show who owned the gravel lane. Therefore, O'Dell could not claim adverse possession of a prescriptive easement. | |||
|rule=* [https://www.quimbee.com/keyterms/prescriptive-easement Prescriptive easement] = an easement acquired by adverse possession | |||
* American courts generally dis-favor prescriptive easements | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://law.justia.com/cases/west-virginia/supreme-court/2010/35488.html | |link=https://law.justia.com/cases/west-virginia/supreme-court/2010/35488.html | ||
|case_text_source=Justia | |case_text_source=Justia | ||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/o-dell-v-stegall | |||
|source_type=Video summary | |||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |||
}} | |||
|case_videos={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video | |||
|service=YouTube | |||
|id=EJ_b7e7ODVY | |||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Video | |||
|service=YouTube | |||
|id=wbqtQc5qPPk | |||
}} | }} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 21:19, April 18, 2024
| O'Dell v. Stegall | |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals |
|---|---|
| Citation | 703 S.E.2d 561 |
| Date decided | November 24, 2010 |
Facts
- O'Dell = purchaser of a church land in West Virginia re-purposed for residential use
- O'Dell's new property had direct access to a public road through a driveway on the building's south side
- On the north side of O'Dell's property was a gravel lane connected to the aforesaid public road
- Ownership of the gravel lane was unknown
- Stegall = owner of a private property dependent on the gravel lane to access the public road; Stegall's house was to the north of the gravel lane
- Stegall was paying for the upkeep of the gravel lane.
Procedural History
- O'Dell sued Stegall & neighbors to the north seeking legal recognition of his prescriptive easement of the gravel lane.
- O'Dell won in the trial court.
Issues
- Must land use supporting a prescriptive easement be adverse, continuous, & either
- actually known or
- open & notorious?
Arguments
- O'Dell argued that he had a prescriptive easement over the gravel road because churchgoers had been using the gravel road on the north to access the former church
- Stegall argued that O'Dell's use of the gravel lane was causing wear & tear
Holding
Yes. A prescriptive easement can only arise from a use that's adverse, continuous, & either actually known or open & notorious.
Judgment
Reversed
Reasons
Justice Ketchum: None of the parties could show who owned the gravel lane. Therefore, O'Dell could not claim adverse possession of a prescriptive easement.
Rule
- Prescriptive easement = an easement acquired by adverse possession
- American courts generally dis-favor prescriptive easements
Resources
