Determine how the court should rule in this case and why. Does it matter that Dixon knew the driveway was located largely on Brant Lake Fishing Company’s (and then Smith’s) property? Should it matter?

The Williams family owned a cabin on Brant Lake in the Adirondack Park in upstate New York. A driveway ran from the cabin across their property to South Nugent Fork Drive. Frank Mason bought
the adjacent lot and built a cabin on it in 1985. To gain access to his property, Mason used a bulldozer to extend the driveway, without the Williams’ permission but also without their objection. In 2010, the Williams sold their property to Brant Lake Fishing Company.

Mason continued to use and maintain the driveway without permission or objection. In 2016, Mason sold his property to Richard Dixon. Dixon and his employees continued to use and maintain the driveway without permission or objection, although Dixon knew it was located largely on Wright’s property. In 2018, Brant Lake Fishing Company sold its lot to Robert Smith. The next year, Smith told Dixon to stop using the driveway. Dixon filed a suit against Smith, claiming an easement by prescription (which is created by meeting the same requirements as adverse possession). (See Transfer of Ownership.)

Position 2 —

Determine how the court should rule in this case and why. Does it matter that Dixon knew the driveway was located largely on Brant Lake Fishing Company’s (and then Smith’s) property? Should it matter?

You should ALWAYS consider using 2 additional reference  sources other than the textbook. When citing the law, remember that is always best to use primary source material or academic research rather than simple web searches, blogs and internet articles.

Last Completed Projects