Prescriptive Easement

180 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Pasco v. City OF Oldsmar
  953 So. 2d 766· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-04-20 ·cited 12×
  The Pascos sued the City of Oldsmar after the city paved a road that cut diagonally across their property. The city sought summary judgment based on statutory dedication under Florida law, claiming the road was presumptively dedicated after four years of continuous maintenance. T
• Sapp v. Gen. Dev. Corp.
  472 So. 2d 544· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-07-03 ·cited 12×
  A landlocked property owner sought a prescriptive easement over adjoining property after the adjoining owner blocked his access road. The court held that because the owner had a statutory way of necessity available to him, he could not simultaneously claim a prescriptive easement
• Ronald W. Kitzinger and Delores v. Kitzinger
  432 So. 2d 188· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-05-25 ·cited 12×
  Gulf Power Company sought a mandatory injunction to remove a corner of the Kitzingers' house that encroached 18.06 feet into Gulf Power's electrical transmission line easement acquired in 1926. The circuit court denied the injunction but imposed an unliquidated lien on the homest
• Platt v. Pietras
  382 So. 2d 414· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-09 ·cited 12×
  Platt, a leaseholder of cattle grazing land, appealed a judgment enjoining him from trespassing on neighboring property owners' lots and blocking platted roads with fencing. The court affirmed, holding that Platt could not acquire a prescriptive right to graze cattle over the ent
• Baya v. Cent. & S. Fla. Flood Control Dist.
  166 So. 2d 846· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-04-22 ·cited 12×
  A common law way of necessity may be established across land to provide access where an alternative route is not reasonably available, though a public prescriptive easement requires clear and definite proof of public use for more than twenty years under a claim of right without c
• Hayes v. T. Glynn Reynolds et ux.
  132 So. 2d 781· Fla. 1st DCA· 1961-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The appellate court reviewed a final decree establishing a public easement and private way of necessity across private lands, questioning the lower court's authority to create a public road and the basis for its decision.
• Dinkins v. Julian
  122 So. 2d 620· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-08-26 ·cited 12×
  Homeowners purchased corner lots with the understanding that a roadway adjacent to their properties was a county road, but later discovered that a developer they had purchased from (through real estate agents) was building a subdivision that would obstruct the roadway. The appell
• City OF Miami Beach v. Undercliff Realty & Inv. Co.
  155 Fla. 805· Fla.· 1945-04-13 ·cited 12×
  Miami Beach sued to establish a dedication to public use of a 30-foot-wide drive and oceanfront beach property in the Alton Beach subdivision, seeking an injunction against private owners from excluding the public. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial referee's dismissal
• Parham v. Erwin K. Reddick and Marjorie Reddick
  537 So. 2d 132· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-12-29 ·cited 11×
  Landowners Robert and Jo Ann Parham appealed a summary judgment denying their trespass damages claim against neighbors who allegedly crossed their property. The appellees (Reddick and McQuinney) counterclaimed for attorney's fees. The court reversed the summary judgment, holding
• Mid-Florida AT Eustis v. Griffin
  521 So. 2d 357· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-03-10 ·cited 11×
  Mid-Florida appeals from a temporary injunction requiring it to remove a fence and dirt barrier on its airport property and maintain aircraft access to Griffin's leased properties. The appellate court vacates the injunction, finding that Griffin failed to establish a clear legal
• James K. Owen et ux. v. James L. Yount et ux.
  198 So. 2d 360· Fla. 2d DCA· 1967-04-26 ·cited 11×
  Owen purchased a drainage easement that was dedicated on a platted subdivision near Lake Winterset, and later attempted to prevent the Younts from using it to access the lake. The court held that while the primary purpose of the recorded easement was drainage, the documented dedi
• State v. S.W. Anderson, Inc.
  744 So. 2d 1098· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-10-06 ·cited 10×
  In this inverse condemnation case, the Florida Department of Transportation appealed a trial court judgment awarding compensation to S.W. Anderson, Inc. for alleged loss of access to its property resulting from construction of a new bridge and realignment of State Road 79. The ap
• Crenshaw v. City of Defuniak Springs
  891 F. Supp. 1548· N.D. Fla.· 1995-05-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate discriminatory intent or a violation of clearly established constitutional law, and the defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.
• Phelps v. Griffith
  629 So. 2d 304· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the use of the road was permissive, not adverse, and therefore did not ripen into a prescriptive easement.
• ST. Clair v. Smith
  445 So. 2d 1113· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-29 ·cited 10×
  The St. Clairs appealed a summary judgment favoring the Smiths in a property boundary dispute. The trial court ruled the Smiths owned adjacent property through adverse possession, had an easement by prescription, and that a long-standing fence constituted the agreed boundary. The
• Trepanier v. Cnty. OF Volusia
  965 So. 2d 276· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-09-14 ·cited 9×
  Beachfront property owners in Volusia County challenged the county's allowance of public vehicular traffic and parking on their platted beach lots, claiming trespass and inverse condemnation. The appellate court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for the county on prescr
• ONE Harbor Fin. Ltd. Co. v. Hynes Props., LLC
  884 So. 2d 1039· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-10-15 ·cited 9×
  One Harbor Financial appeals a quiet title judgment eliminating an easement across property owned by Hynes Properties. The easement was created by Paul Hoffenberg, who owned both parcels, in a 1986 agreement that was void because one cannot grant an easement to oneself when ownin
• Bentz v. Carroll McDANIEL and Melvene J. McDaniel
  872 So. 2d 978· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-05-07 ·cited 9×
  The Bentzes held an easement across the McDaniels' property for river access. The trial court extinguished the easement based on adverse possession and held it did not extend to the river. The appellate court reversed, finding insufficient clear and convincing evidence of adverse
• F.E. Trammell and Mozelle Trammell v. Ward
  667 So. 2d 223· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-08-21 ·cited 9×
  The Trammells sought easement rights to access their landlocked 40-acre parcel across the Wards' property, while the Wards sought a way of necessity across the Trammells' land. The trial court granted reciprocal easements based on a stipulated agreement, but the court reversed in
• Genet v. City OF Hollywood
  400 So. 2d 787· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-06-10 ·cited 8×
  A municipality cannot acquire title to property by presumed dedication under § 95.361, Florida Statutes, without proof of both construction and maintenance for the statutory period; a prescriptive easement cannot be established where proof fails to demonstrate that public use was
• Deseret Ranches OF Fla., Inc. v. Bowman
  389 So. 2d 1072· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-10-29 ·cited 8×
  Deseret Ranches appealed a trial court judgment granting appellees a prescriptive easement over ranch property for a 30-foot-wide, 9-mile road. The appellate court reversed, finding that appellees failed to prove the use was sufficiently open, continuous, and adverse as required
• Jones v. Halekulani Hotel, Inc.
  557 F.2d 1308· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 8×
  Summary judgment for the hotel was proper because the hotel did not exert sufficient control over the seawall to create a duty of care to the injured party, and the seawall was a public thoroughfare.
• Stack v. Okaloosa Cnty.
  347 So. 2d 145· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-06-27 ·cited 8×
  This eminent domain appeal concerns a trial court's erroneous grant of a prescriptive easement when the County failed to prove public necessity for condemnation. The court reversed, holding that the prescriptive easement was a gratuitous grant unsupported by pleadings and against
• George W. Manning and his wife v. A. L. Hall and his wife
  110 So. 2d 424· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-04-08 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed a permanent injunction granting appellees the right to maintain a drainage ditch across appellants' land. The case establishes that when adjacent landowners jointly construct and maintain a drainage system with mutual consent and contribution, neither party may
• S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. & Am. Tel. & Tel. Co. v. S. Precision Pattern Works, Inc.
  251 F.2d 537· 5th Cir.· 1958-01-03 ·cited 8×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding no conflict between the prior case cited and its original decision.
• Himonas v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co.
  179 F.2d 171· 10th Cir.· 1949-12-23 ·cited 8×
  A prescriptive easement for an irrigation ditch across a railroad's right of way, granted under the Act of March 3, 1875, can be acquired if the use is public and does not interfere with the railroad's operations.
• Umhau v. Bazzuro
  133 F.2d 356· D.C. Cir.· 1942-11-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the tenants' use of the appellees' land was not sufficiently adverse or continuous to establish a prescriptive easement, as it was often permissive and lacked privity.
• Thrasher v. Arida
  858 So. 2d 1173· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-11-07 ·cited 7×
  Vivian Thrasher appeals a quiet title judgment determining that a 1969 warranty deed conveyed fee simple title to a 50-foot strip of land (Parcel Two) to the Schomburgs, rather than merely an easement. The court reverses, finding a latent ambiguity in the deed's language and stru
• Barber v. Oakhills Ests. P'ship
  583 So. 2d 1114· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-08-09 ·cited 7×
  The court held that attorney's fees under section 57.105(1) require the entire action to be frivolous, not just a portion.
• Gibson v. Buice
  394 So. 2d 451· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-02-04 ·cited 7×
  Appellants Gibson challenged a judgment granting appellees Buice and Cheezem a prescriptive easement over 20 feet of the Gibsons' land. The appellate court reversed, finding that the appellees failed to establish the elements necessary for a prescriptive easement, particularly be
• Watley v. Fla. Power & Light Co.
  192 So. 2d 27· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-11-03 ·cited 7×
  Appellant sought damages for injuries sustained when his television antenna contacted a high-tension electrical line owned by appellee Florida Power and Light Company. The court affirmed summary judgment for the defendant, holding that appellant's testimony regarding a 5-6 foot e
• Grenell v. Scott
  134 So. 2d 866· Fla. 2d DCA· 1961-11-15 ·cited 7×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a chancery decree establishing a 25-foot-wide public road easement (Old Fulton Road) over the Grenells' property, finding the evidence insufficient to support that width and reducing it to 14 feet based on actual testimony of road usage.
• Sunnybrook Groves, Inc. v. Alice L. Hicks and her husband
  113 So. 2d 239· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-06-19 ·cited 7×
  Sunnybrook Groves appeals a decree granting appellees a prescriptive easement over a dirt road that provides the only access to their property. The court affirms the finding of a prescriptive easement but reverses and remands regarding the specificity of the easement's dimensions
• Richardson v. Jackson
  667 So. 2d 928· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-02-09 ·cited 6×
  A prescriptive easement granted for 'access, ingress and egress, roadway purposes' over a 25-foot strip reserves the entire 25-foot width for the dominant tenement owner's use, and the servient tenement owner may not place permanent structures anywhere within that full width.
• Telesco v. Nooner & Neal Co., Inc.
  600 So. 2d 1291· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-06-25 ·cited 6×
  The Telescos appealed a final judgment establishing a prescriptive easement for road purposes across their property. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that the trial court failed to establish the essential element of adverse use required for a prescriptive ease
• Cook v. The Proctor & Gamble Cellulose Co.
  599 So. 2d 688· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-05-08 ·cited 6×
  Barry Cook and Samuel Rives appealed a summary judgment awarded to Proctor & Gamble Cellulose Company in a prescriptive easement dispute. The court reversed the summary judgment in Proctor & Gamble's favor because material factual disputes existed regarding whether the company's
• J. L. Cooper and wife v. Davis
  156 So. 2d 169· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-09-13 ·cited 6×
  Adjoining property owners disputed a 15-foot strip of land, with appellees claiming adverse possession and the trial court finding appellants owned the title but allowing an easement for a long-used thoroughfare. The appellate court reversed the easement finding, holding that app
• McLEOD v. Buell Carr
  90 So. 2d 112· Fla.· 1956-10-24 ·cited 6×
  McLeod sought to enjoin the City of Panama City's vacation of two streets (Nelson Street and an unnamed street), arguing that the closure violated his property rights by obstructing ingress and egress. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's summary judgment dismissi
• Rabia Ardan Morris v. Winbar LLC
  273 So. 3d 176· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-04-09 ·cited 5×
  The law of the case doctrine does not preclude a trial court from determining whether a prescriptive easement is appurtenant or in gross when that issue was not actually decided in the prior appellate affirmance, and the trial court may reconsider the matter on remand to prevent
• DAN v. BSJ Realty, LLC
  953 So. 2d 640· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-03-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish that their use of the private roadway was adverse to the lawful owners, thus they did not acquire a prescriptive easement.
• In & for Sussex Cnty. Dewey Beach Lions Club, Inc.
  2006 WL 701980· Del. Ch.· 2006-08-21 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed the Master's decision denying the landowners' claim to a prescriptive easement. The court found that the landowners failed to prove their use of the disputed strip of land was either not permissive or exclusive against the general public. Therefore, the landown
• Avery L. Tyler and Florence Tyler v. Price
  821 So. 2d 1121· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-06-19 ·cited 5×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's judgment that extinguished an easement across real property based on the doctrine of merger of title. The court held that merger cannot occur when the ownership of the dominant and servient estates is unequal in the qua
• Jonita, Inc. v. Lewis
  368 So. 2d 114· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-03-08 ·cited 5×
  Jonita, Inc. appeals a judgment granting easement rights to subdivision property owners over a closed section of Entrance Road and imposing restrictions on fence construction around a golf course. The court held that easement rights cannot be created by implication based solely o
• Bishop v. Nussbaum
  175 So. 2d 231· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-04-28 ·cited 5×
  Property owners sought a declaratory judgment that an alley running behind their residences had been dedicated to public use. The trial court found a common-law dedication had occurred, but the appellate court reversed, holding the evidence did not meet the clear and unequivocal
• Stackman v. Pope
  28 So. 3d 131· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court held that the uncontroverted evidence was insufficient to establish the required elements of a prescriptive easement. Summary judgment was therefore improper.
• Brewer v. Flankey
  660 So. 2d 761· Fla. 5th DCA· 1995-08-25 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed a judgment establishing a prescriptive easement because the plaintiffs failed to prove that they or their predecessors in title used the disputed property continuously for the required twenty-year period.
• Foster Burgess v. Edgar F. Burd and wife
  654 So. 2d 1028· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-05-16 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed the trial court's judgment granting a private prescriptive easement, finding the record failed to demonstrate that the appellees' use of trails across the appellant's property was adverse for the requisite statutory period.
• State v. BEN Hill Griffin, Inc.
  636 So. 2d 825· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Department of Transportation appealed a judgment awarding attorney's fees to Ben Hill Griffin, Inc. in an eminent domain proceeding. The court reversed, holding that attorney's fees under Florida's eminent domain statute require the party to have an ownership interest
• Tatum v. Dance
  605 So. 2d 110· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-08-14 ·cited 4×
  In a foreclosure action, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the trial court's decision recognizing that a mortgagor holds an irrevocable license to drain surface water from his paved automobile dealership onto adjacent property. The court cla
• Perkins v. Anderson
  518 So. 2d 1354· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-14 ·cited 4×
  Property owners appealed the denial of their cross- and counterclaims seeking declaratory judgment to quiet title, establish a way of necessity, and obtain an injunction against water flooding from an adjacent lake. The appellate court reversed on the statutory way of necessity c