Colvin v. Burnet
17 Wend. 564 · New York Supreme Court · 1837
Facts
The defendant claimed a presumptive title to an easement based on twenty years of adverse enjoyment, concerning "water courses and ways" and "flowing land." The plaintiffs challenged the defendant's pleas, arguing they were defective due to insufficient continuity of possession, inadequate time, and lack of privity between Foreman & Wilson and the defendant. The defendant's pleas described holding peaceably and without hinderance, molestation, or claim from the owner.
Procedural history
The case came before the court on the plaintiffs' demurrers to the defendant's pleas. The defendant had filed pleas asserting a presumptive title to an easement, which the plaintiffs challenged as legally insufficient. The court is ruling on the merits of these demurrers.
Issue
Are pleas asserting a presumptive title to an easement based on twenty years of enjoyment legally sufficient if they fail to explicitly state that the possession was adverse?
Holding
The court held that the defendant's pleas were fatally defective because they failed to allege that the possession underlying the claimed easement was adverse, and therefore, judgment must be for the plaintiffs on all demurrers.
Rule
To establish a presumptive title to an easement, the possession must be adverse, meaning it is continued, uninterrupted, and under a claim of right, with the owner's acquiescence and knowledge. A plea asserting such an easement is fatally defective if it does not explicitly aver that the possession was adverse, even if it states the possession was peaceable and without hinderance. The court reasoned that the adverse nature of possession is a critical ingredient, analogous to the requirements for adverse possession in ejectment.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.