Claudia S. Johnsen v. Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby

D.C. Circuit

Claudia S. Johnsen v. Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby

288 F.2d 374, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 390

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedDecember 15, 1960

Docket15718

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 288 F.2d 374 (Claudia S. Johnsen v. Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Claudia S. Johnsen v. Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby, 288 F.2d 374, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 390 (D.C. Cir. 1960).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby sued to enjoin Claudia S. Johnsen from obstructing or interfering with the normal use of a four-foot passway extending from the rear of the latter's premises on Massachusetts Avenue to Que Street. She alleged she and her predecessors in title to. a Que Street parcel adjacent to the alleged passway had used it for more than, twenty years adversely and under a claim of right; that this use had been “continuous, open, notorious, uninterrupted,, exclusive, peaceful, and with knowledge- and acquiescence of the owners of lot 30-[the servient estate], during said period', until in or about the month of June, 1954,. when the defendants erected or caused to be erected a fence obstructing and' closing said right of way, over the protest of the plaintiff and causing the-plaintiff to suffer irreparable injury.”

After hearing evidence, the District. Judge made factual findings which justified his holding that, prior to 1954, “there was a sufficiently continuous use-of the alley for a sufficiently long period', of time to establish the prescriptive right in the owner and occupant of 2008 Que-Street [Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby] of a. right-of-way through that alley.”

The owner of the servient estate appeals. We are of the view that the evidence as a whole gives substantial support to the trial judge’s findings. His-judgment, which logically followed those-findings, must be upheld.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby sued to enjoin Claudia S. Johnsen from obstructing or interfering with the normal use of a four-foot passway extending from the rear of the latter's premises on Massachusetts Avenue to Que Street. She alleged she and her predecessors in title to. a Que Street parcel adjacent to the alleged passway had used it for more than, twenty years adversely and under a claim of right; that this use had been “continuous, open, notorious, uninterrupted,, exclusive, peaceful, and with knowledge- and acquiescence of the owners of lot 30-[the servient estate], during said period', until in or about the month of June, 1954,. when the defendants erected or caused to be erected a fence obstructing and' closing said right of way, over the protest of the plaintiff and causing the-plaintiff to suffer irreparable injury.”

After hearing evidence, the District. Judge made factual findings which justified his holding that, prior to 1954, “there was a sufficiently continuous use-of the alley for a sufficiently long period', of time to establish the prescriptive right in the owner and occupant of 2008 Que-Street [Mrs. C. Phelps Crosby] of a. right-of-way through that alley.”

The owner of the servient estate appeals. We are of the view that the evidence as a whole gives substantial support to the trial judge’s findings. His-judgment, which logically followed those-findings, must be upheld.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 F.2d 374, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claudia-s-johnsen-v-mrs-c-phelps-crosby-cadc-1960.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack