Logourl black

Property

Exam 1
30 minutes

Fact Pattern

A owns Lot #1, located in a small, residential subdivision consisting of one street running east to west. Lot #1 is the only lot on the cul-de-sac at the western end of the street. Adjoining Lot #1, further to the west, is a public park. The park cannot be reached from this street without crossing Lot #1.

On the same street, to the east of Lot #1, are Lot #2 and Lot #3. These lots are owned by B and C, respectively. A, B, and C are the original owners of their respective lots, which they purchased 13 years ago when the subdivision was created from a single large parcel of land.

At least once per week since purchasing their lots, B and C have walked across Lot #1 to reach the park. They have always taken the same route, just inside the southern boundary of Lot #1. Over the years, B and C have worn a small footpath along this route. This footpath would be visible to anyone inspecting Lot #1. Because of the way the public roads are situated, if B and C could not cross Lot #1, they would have to drive five miles to reach the park.

Neither B nor C has ever spoken with A about using the footpath. On many occasions, A has smiled and waved to B and C as they walked along the footpath. At other times, A has crossed the yard to the footpath and talked briefly with B or C about sports, the weather, or other general topics. At no time has A given express permission to B or C to use Lot #1, nor has A ever expressly prohibited this use.

After 13 years of ownership, A sells Lot #1 in fee simple to D. One week later, B sells Lot #2 in fee simple to E. The deeds and other documents underlying these sales make no mention of any rights of access across Lot #1.

In the days immediately following the sale of Lot #1, C and E continue to use the footpath. They do not discuss this use with D, nor is it clear whether D is aware of this use. Within two weeks of purchasing Lot #1, D posts a sign at the entrance to the footpath that reads, “No Trespassing.”  When C and E inquire about the sign, D tells them that they are no longer allowed to cross the property. C insists that C and E have an easement permitting them to cross Lot #1 via the footpath, based on B and C’s history of using the footpath. C also points out to D that without the use of the path, it will be much more difficult for C and E to get to the park. D does not relent. The statute of limitations for adverse possession in this jurisdiction is 10 years. 


Questions

  1. When D prohibited the use of the footpath, did C or E have any legal interest that would permit either to continue to use the footpath over D’s objection? Explain.

Question 1

When D prohibited the use of the footpath, did C or E have any legal interest that would permit either to continue to use the footpath over D’s objection? Explain.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Here's why 203,000 law students rely on our practice exams:

  • Written by law professors.
  • Uniform format for all our exams.
  • Model answers included for every exam.
  • Use our exams to prepare for the Multistate Essay Examination (MEE).
  • Unlimited access to 252 exams with model answers in 13 subjects.
  • Top-notch customer support.
  • 24/7 access on desktop, tablet, or mobile devices.
Start Your Free Trial Now