Williams Island Country Club, Inc. v. San Simeon at the California Club, Ltd.
Florida Court of Appeal
454 So. 2d 23 (1984)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Prior to 1979, Sky Lake Development, Inc. (Sky Lake) owned an 18-hole golf course and a development tract and entry strip. Sky Lake sold the development tract and entry strip to an entity controlled by Harry Peisach. The contract provided that the new owner would grant certain reasonable easements for golf carts and maintenance, but no express easement was ever granted. The path between the 13th and 14th holes of the golf course went across the entry strip and was paved. There was no other practical of safe alternative route for golf carts between the 13th and 14th holes. Williams Island Country Club, Inc. (Williams) (plaintiff) purchased the golf course and was told by Peisach that Williams had an easement across the entry strip. Peisach then sold the development tract and entry strip to San Simeon at the California Club, Ltd. (San Simeon) (defendant). Before the purchase, San Simeon was told of the easement for the golf-cart path. San Simeon and Williams could not come to an agreement over the use of the entry strip as a path for golfers, and San Simeon bulldozed the path and blocked access over the entry strip. Williams sued, seeking a declaratory judgment that Williams had title to an easement by implication. Williams requested a preliminary injunction. The trial court denied the request, and Williams appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sharp, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.