Frenning v. Dow
Rhode Island Supreme Court
544 A.2d 145 (1988)
- Written by Rebecca Green, JD
Facts
Gray once owned the property now owned by Clarence Dow (defendant). Shaw once owned the property now owned by Blanche Frenning (plaintiff). Gray granted Shaw an easement to cross what is now Dow’s property. At the time the easement was granted, Shaw’s property consisted of 102 acres. Since that time, Shaw and Frenning acquired an additional 150 acres of contiguous property. Frenning’s total holdings now consist of 257 acres, and Frenning uses the easement across Dow’s property to service all 257 acres of property. Frenning sued Dow. The trial court found that the use of the easement to service Frenning’s additional 150 acres constituted a material increase in use and, therefore, was not allowed by the original easement agreement. The trial court held that there was no way to sever this unlawful increased burden and still preserve the original easement because there was no practical way to monitor Frenning’s use of the easement. Accordingly, the trial court concluded that the easement had been extinguished or terminated. Frenning appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Weisberger, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.
