Bunn v. Offutt
Virginia Supreme Court
222 S.E.2d 522 (1976)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
T.J. Offutt (defendant) owned an apartment development with a pool. Offutt also owned the adjacent lot and sold it to Harvey and Rosabelle Wynn. The purchase contract stated: “Use of apartment swimming pool to be available to purchaser and his family.” The deed contained no reference to the pool. Seven years later, the Wynns agreed to sell the property to Edward and Sandra Bunn (plaintiffs). The Wynns’ real estate agent used the value of being able to use the swimming pool as a selling point to the Bunns. However, neither the purchase contract nor the deed referenced the pool. The real estate agent later informed the Bunns that Offutt had not granted them access to the pool. The Bunns brought suit, claiming that they had an easement on Offutt’s property to use the pool. Offutt testified that he never intended the right to use the pool to extend to subsequent purchasers after the Wynns. The trial court held that the Bunns did not have an easement. The Bunns appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Harrison, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 782,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
