Implied-in-fact dedication case

User avatar
steffan
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: N CA

Implied-in-fact dedication case

Postby steffan » Thu Jan 10, 2019 11:22 am

Newly published appellate decision expanding on the recent Scher v Burke decision:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
goodgps
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm
Location: Modesto, Ca

Re: Implied-in-fact dedication case

Postby goodgps » Sun Jan 13, 2019 7:13 am

Wow. Thank you.
This case may assist a property owner who has been using a proposed irrigation easement for many years. The proposed easement was shown in a parcel map but never formally accepted or otherwise documented. Suddenly a new property owner of the encumbered parcel decided to close the irrigation ditch and lock out the users.
The new owners attorney called the users of the easement telling them not to trespass anymore.

User avatar
steffan
Posts: 171
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: N CA

Re: Implied-in-fact dedication case

Postby steffan » Sun Jan 13, 2019 8:38 pm

GoodGPS, I don’t know. I have a different impression of this case’s applicability to your sitution. But then again, I’ve been wrong before.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests