Nelson v. Johnson
Idaho Supreme Court
679 P.2d 662 (1984)
- Written by John Yi, JD
Facts
Robert and Marjorie Wake sold a portion of their land to Jess and Maud Hess but reserved for themselves a right of way and the right to use water from a spring on the property. The easements were “for the watering of livestock owned by the sellers . . . .” Prior to this division, part of the land was used as a dry farm and the other as a cattle ranch. The Wakes sold the dry farm and kept the ranch. The Hesses then sold the farm to the Johnsons (defendants). Years later, the Wakes sold the cattle ranch to the Nelsons (plaintiffs) along with their “right for stock water” from the spring in the dry farm. Whereas the Wakes used the easements as a matter of right, the Johnsons purported to grant the Nelsons “permission” to use the road and the spring. The Johnsons later purported to revoke that permission and soon denied the Nelsons access to the road and spring. The Nelsons sued to enforce their easement rights. The district court held that the Nelsons had an appurtenant easement in the road and spring, the farm being the servient estate and the ranch being the dominant estate. The Johnsons appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Huntley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 833,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
