Kotraba v. Akers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kotraba v. Akers

194 A.D.2d 524, 599 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5445

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 1, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 194 A.D.2d 524 (Kotraba v. Akers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kotraba v. Akers, 194 A.D.2d 524, 599 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5445 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15 to determine the defendants’ right to an easement over the plaintiff’s land, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Fitzer, J.H.O.), dated September 21, 1990, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendants intended to abandon the easement in question (see, Strevell v Mink, 6 NY2d 850; Briggs v Di Donna, 176 AD2d 1105; Carnemella v Sadowy, 147 AD2d 874; see also, 2 Warren’s Weed, New York Real Property, Easements, § 12.01 [4th ed]). Therefore, the trial court properly dismissed the complaint. Lawrence, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action pursuant to RPAPL article 15 to determine the defendants’ right to an easement over the plaintiff’s land, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Fitzer, J.H.O.), dated September 21, 1990, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendant dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendants intended to abandon the easement in question (see, Strevell v Mink, 6 NY2d 850; Briggs v Di Donna, 176 AD2d 1105; Carnemella v Sadowy, 147 AD2d 874; see also, 2 Warren’s Weed, New York Real Property, Easements, § 12.01 [4th ed]). Therefore, the trial court properly dismissed the complaint. Lawrence, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 A.D.2d 524, 599 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kotraba-v-akers-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack