Thompson v. E.I.G. Palace Mall, LLC
South Dakota Supreme Court
657 N.W.2d 300 (2003)
- Written by Eric Cervone, LLM
Facts
Mary Eilen Thompson and others (plaintiffs) owned a restaurant next to a parking lot owned by E.I.G. Palace Mall, LLC (E.I.G.) (defendant). The restaurant and parking lot had previously been owned by the same person. The parking lot was open to the public and was used regularly by restaurant patrons and restaurant delivery trucks. E.I.G. sought to develop the parking lot for other uses, but the restaurant owners opposed this change. The restaurant owners argued they had a prescriptive easement that gave them a right to use part of the parking lot for their customer parking and restaurant access. E.I.G. argued that because the parking lot was open to the public, the restaurant owners’ use did not meet the open-and-notorious standard required for a prescriptive right. The restaurant owners also argued that they had an implied easement, because the parking lot was the only way delivery trucks could reach the restaurant. The lower court granted summary judgment to E.I.G. on both the prescriptive-easement and implied-easement theories. The restaurant owners appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Konenkamp, 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.
