Jay Milam (defendant) agreed to create an artificial lake on property owned by the Camps (plaintiffs) in return for a parcel of land and free access to the lake. Upon completion of the work, the Camps conveyed the parcel to Milam. The deed did not reference the lake. Thereafter, Milam built a house on the land and used the lake recreationally for at least five years. The Camps subsequently brought suit, seeking Milam’s eviction, contending that Milam’s use of the lake interfered with theirs. Milam filed a cross-bill arguing that, based on the agreement between the parties, he had full possessory rights to the lake, which constituted an easement and covenant running with the land. The trial court found in Milam’s favor, concluding that Milam had title to water rights to the lake constituting an easement appurtenant. The Camps appealed, contending that Milam’s use of the lake was permitted only by a revocable license.