Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to French
Lewis v. Young
Facts
In 1956, Herman and Jeanette Brown divided a parcel of land into three pieces. They sold one piece to Marygaele and Theodore Jaffe, and another to Donald and Gertrude Katz. They kept the third piece for themselves. The deed of conveyance to the Jaffes also conveyed three easements, including a right to the perpetual use of the Browns’ main driveway. The deed did not specifically describe the location of the driveway, and did not mention any right to relocate the driveway. The Browns’ parcel was purchased by Neda Young (Defendant) and her husband in 1990. They wished to make extensive improvements to the property, including building a new home, swimming pool, and tennis court. The tennis court overlay the original main driveway, so they relocated the driveway. The relocated driveway ran almost the same course as the old driveway. The Jaffe’s property then passed to Roger Lewis (Plaintiff), who almost immediately demanded that the Youngs refinish the relocated driveway with a hard surface and plant evergreen trees along both sides. The Youngs agreed to do so, but the refinishing was delayed by Mr. Young’s death. Plaintiff demanded that Defendant complete the improvements on the driveway within ten days, and threatened to reconstruct the original driveway at her expense. He later sued Defendant, seeking an injunction requiring her to restore the driveway to its original location. The trial court granted him partial summary judgment, holding that he had a permanent easement over Defendant’s property that she had no right to move. The court granted his request for an order compelling Defendant to restore the driveway at its original location or allow him to restore it at her expense. The intermediate appellate court affirmed, and Defendant appealed to the state supreme court.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.