Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 17,300+ case briefs...

Thurston Enterprises, Inc. v. Baldi

New Hampshire Supreme Court
128 N.H. 760 (1986)


Thurston Enterprises, Inc. (Thurston) (plaintiff) operated a marina adjoining a drive-in movie theater owned by Lawrence Baldi (defendant). In 1978, Baldi sold part of his land to Thurston so that Thurston could develop the land into parking and boat-storage facilities for the marina. At the time of the sale, vehicles could not access the sold land except by traveling over Baldi’s drive-in theater. As a result, Baldi deeded Thurston an easement across the theater that consisted of a 50-foot wide course beginning at the theater entrance, passing under the theater marquee, going past the ticket booth, and crossing into Thurston’s parcel. In 1979, Thurston began using the easement to truck-fill his parcel. The paving on the right of way was not designed for heavy truck traffic. Further, the 10-wheeled trucks were too high to pass under the marquee and too wide to stay on the right of way as they went around the ticket booth. Consequently, the trucks went around the marquee rather than under it, and went into speaker aisles that were not part of the easement. The trucks destroyed the pavement and caused deep ruts both in the right of way and where they had veered out of the right of way. Thurston filed a petition to enjoin Baldi from blocking the easement. The court-appointed master found that, at the time of the conveyance, neither party had contemplated that the right of way would be so extensively used by heavy trucks. The master further found that Thurston had destroyed the right of way’s surface and subsurface by using the easement unreasonably and enlarging the granted easement. The master ordered Thurston to repave the easement, repair the speaker aisles, limit his trucks to no more than five per day, and rebuild the rutted areas of the right of way. Both parties appealed.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Batchelder, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 457,000 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.

  2. 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 457,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 17,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial