Austin v. . Willis

170 S.E. 925, 205 N.C. 831, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 611
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 20, 1933·Published

Opinion

*832 Pee CubiaM.

Tbe only question raised by tbe defendant is whether the evidence justifies the finding that the plaintiff has an easement in the driveway described in the complaint as appurtenant to his land. It is insisted that the user must be “adverse and of right,” as pointed out in Mebane v. Patrick, 46 N. C., 23; that the plaintiff has failed to show that the defendant had knowledge of any claim of right to the asserted easement; and that the action should have been dismissed. We think there is sufficient evidence to sustain the finding; and the charge as to adverse user is clear, explicit, and free from error.

No error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Austin v. . Willis, 170 S.E. 925, 205 N.C. 831, 1933 N.C. LEXIS 611 (N.C. 1933).

170 S.E. 925 (Austin v. . Willis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mebane v. . Patrick
46 N.C. 23 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1853)