Jan. 2026 Magazine - Flipbook - Page 11
ATTORNEY’S ANGLE
Albert and Chisholm Trail sued, seeking a
declaratory judgment that they held an
easement by estoppel, an easement by
necessity, and a prescriptive easement for
the gravel
crossing. The case proceeded to a jury trial.
The jury found that Albert was
entitled to an easement by estoppel, an
easement by necessity, and a
prescriptive easement over the railroad
crossing.
Western appealed, arguing the evidence was
legally insufficient to support the easement
findings and factually insufficient to support the
trespass findings. The court of appeals reversed
and rendered judgment for Western as to the
easement claims, holding that the evidence was
legally insufficient to support all three easement
findings.
,,
Western sent Albert a cease-and-desist
letter demanding that he and Chisholm
Trail stop using the gravel crossing.
BECAUSE EASEMENTS APPURTENANT
ARE REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS,
THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS GENERALLY
REQUIRES THAT A SIGNED WRITING
EVIDENCE THEIR CREATION OR
TRANSFER.
,,
An easement is a nonpossessory interest in real property that authorizes its holder to use another’s property
for a particular purpose. An easement entitling an adjacent landowner to cross over an adjoining tract of
land—also called a
