Burcky v. Knowles
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
413 A.2d 585 (1980)
In 1934, Garland conveyed property to the defendant’s predecessor in interest via a deed with a right-of-way easement. In 1953, Garland conveyed another parcel adjacent to the first. The deed reserved an easement that extended the right of way reserved in the 1934 deed. The 1953 deed, however, stated that the easement would pass to the grantor’s “heirs and assigns.” The plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment to resolve easement rights over the defendant’s land. The trial court determined that because the 1934 deed did not contain words of inheritance, it needed to ascertain the intent of the parties. In so doing, the court held that the 1934 deed created an easement in gross.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Bois, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.