WILLIAM L. FURLONG AND JANE P. FURLONG, APPELLANTS,
v.
FULLER & JOHNSON, P.A., AND S. WILLIAM FULLER, JR., FRED M. JOHNSON AND PATRICK J. FARRELL, JR., INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Appellants are estopped from asserting rights in derogation of a recorded deed that created perpetual use of alleyways, as they had notice of its provisions.
Appellants, owners of a majority of a parcel derived from a deed, were enjoined from interfering with alleyway use by owners of another parcel. The de…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Successor In Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellants seek review of an order by which they are enjoined from interfering with the use of certain parcels of real property. We affirm the order appealed.
Appellants are property owners whose title is derived from a recorded deed which provides that certain alleyways “shall be kept open perpetually for the free use and benefit of the owners and tenants of said land ... and the title thereto shall be held in common_” By this deed several parcels were conveyed, and appellants now own the majority of one of these parcels. In enjoining appellants from interfering with the use of the alleyways by the owners or possessors of another parcel, the trial court ruled that appellants are es-topped from asserting “any right or title in derogation of the deed.”
On appeal appellants contend that estoppel should not apply since appellees are strangers to the deed from which title is derived. However, this circumstance does not alter appellants’ position as successors in interest under a deed of record at the time their interest was conveyed. Appellants were on notice as to the provisions regarding the use of the alleyways, and the doctrine of estoppel is thus properly applied. See Leffier v. Smith, 388 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
The order appealed is affirmed.
MILLS and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Est. OF Mary Grace Johnston v. TPE Hotels, Inc., 719 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…g easement. Persons in the chain of title are on notice as to easements and limitations created by recorded deeds in their chain of title and they are estopped to claim otherwise, absent additional circumstances. Furlong v. Fuller and Johnson, P.A., 492 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). In this ease, we think the facts and circumstances were such that Mary Grace, as the successor owner of the dominant tenement, and her tenants on the property are estopped to claim any continuing right to the perpetual easement…
Authorities Cited
- Leffler v. Smith, 388 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)