From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mehl v. Roberts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 22, 1982
86 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

January 22, 1982

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.

Present — Simons, J.P., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Denman and Schnepp, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: Special Term improperly granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment imposing a prescriptive easement for driveway use on a narrow strip of defendants' property. The record presents triable issues of fact including whether the use by plaintiffs was "continuous and uninterrupted" ( Panzica v Galasso, 285 App. Div. 859, 860, affd 309 N.Y. 978) for the prescribed period (see Arrow Bldrs. Supply Corp. v. Royal Nat. Bank of N.Y., 21 N.Y.2d 428, 431; Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 N.Y.2d 395, 404).


Summaries of

Mehl v. Roberts

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jan 22, 1982
86 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Mehl v. Roberts

Case Details

Full title:RONALD T. MEHL et al., Respondents, v. RICHARD ROBERTS et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jan 22, 1982

Citations

86 A.D.2d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)