Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Hickerson v. Bender
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. Review the Facts of this case here:
George and Lucille Fagan owned a parcel of land known as Lot 20 in the H.R. White First Subdivision of Gull Lake Shores. In 1955, the Fagans conveyed a portion of their property known as the Ruth Lake parcel to Anna Marie and Roy Becker. The Fagans also granted the Beckers an easement over the eastern part of Lot 20 for the purpose of ingress and egress to Gull Lake. In 1961, Kenneth and Ruth Swisher acquired the Ruth Lake parcel. In 1990, the Swishers’ heirs conveyed the parcel to the Plaintiffss (Plaintiffs). In 1958, the Fagans conveyed Lot 20 to Edgar and Virginia E. Bender (Defendants). The deed of conveyance for Lot 20 did not reference the easement. Between 1958 and 1962, Defendants erected a home and garage and made other improvements on Lot 20. These improvements materially blocked access to the easement. Plaintiffs sued, seeking a declaration that the easement was enforceable and that Defendants should no longer interfere with Plaintiffs’ use of the easement. At trial, Bender and a few neighbors testified that they had never seen anyone use the easement since Defendants acquired Lot 20 in 1959. Several other witnesses, however, including the Swishers and Jack Hickerson, testified that the easement had been used on several occasions during the Swishers’ and Plaintiffs’ ownership of the Gull Lake parcel. The trial court ruled that the easement had been extinguished by abandonment and adverse possession before Hickerson acquired the Gull Lake parcel.
- 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.