Home/New York Court of Appeals/Filby v. Brooks

Filby v. Brooks

485 N.E.2d 1027, 66 N.Y.2d 640, 495 N.Y.S.2d 362, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17174
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 8, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 485 N.E.2d 1027 (Filby v. Brooks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Filby v. Brooks, 485 N.E.2d 1027, 66 N.Y.2d 640, 495 N.Y.S.2d 362, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17174 (N.Y. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

This dispute among neighbors concerns an easement contained in plaintiff’s deed, which gives her a right of ingress and egress over Flower Hill Road. Plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring defendants to remove a barrier from its new location on Flower Hill Road and restore it to its original location on Flower Hill Road. Whatever rights defendants may have acquired to the easement by adverse possession, based on the long-continued existence of a barrier at one location on Flower Hill Road (see, Brand v Prince, 35 NY2d 634, 636; Belotti v Bickhardt, 228 NY 296, 302), defendants obtained no right to move that barrier to a new location on Flower Hill Road so as to further restrict plaintiff’s use of the road, a move which was promptly objected to by plaintiff. While defendants contend that removal of the barrier they placed at the new location would require entry onto the property of a nonparty, plaintiff’s property interest in ingress and egress permits removal of the barrier on the road. We therefore affirm the order of the Appellate Division directing removal of the barrier from its new location, and reach no other issue.

[642]*642Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

Kaur v. Lema
2020 NY Slip Op 05733 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Foti v. Noftsier
72 A.D.3d 1605 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Ryan v. Posner
68 A.D.3d 963 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Meyer v. Stout
45 A.D.3d 1445 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Gold v. Di Cerbo
41 A.D.3d 1051 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Spier v. Horowitz
16 A.D.3d 400 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Green v. Mann
237 A.D.2d 566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Columbia Gas Transmission Corp. v. Bishop
809 F. Supp. 220 (W.D. New York, 1992)
Agee v. Ajar
154 A.D.2d 569 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Spiegel v. Ferraro
541 N.E.2d 15 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
Leising v. Town of Clarence
144 A.D.2d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Spiegel v. Ferraro
142 A.D.2d 573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Taylor v. Devendorf
140 A.D.2d 510 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Armour v. Marino
140 A.D.2d 752 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
485 N.E.2d 1027, 66 N.Y.2d 640, 495 N.Y.S.2d 362, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/filby-v-brooks-ny-1985.