Case Name: The WILLIAM W. ZEIGLER TRUST, et al., Appellants, v. COFRAN SUNDAY SUNSHINE CANNON, etc., et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2014-10-08
Citations: 148 So. 3d 158
Docket Number: No. 3D12-2605
Parties: The WILLIAM W. ZEIGLER TRUST, et al., Appellants, v. COFRAN SUNDAY SUNSHINE CANNON, etc., et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEPHERD, C.J., and WELLS and LAGOA, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 148
Pages: 158–158

Head Matter:
The WILLIAM W. ZEIGLER TRUST, et al., Appellants, v. COFRAN SUNDAY SUNSHINE CANNON, etc., et al., Appellees.
No. 3D12-2605.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct. 8, 2014.
Horan, Wallace & Higgins and David Paul Horan (Key West), for appellants.
Stones & Cardenas and Adele V. Stones (Key West), for appellees.
Before SHEPHERD, C.J., and WELLS and LAGOA, JJ.

Opinion:
SHEPHERD, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from a final judgment construing a Deed Granting Easement over property in Monroe County. The parties stipulated that their cross-motions for summary judgment "involve exclusively questions of law, [that] no genuine issue of material fact is involved, and that the issue before the court is the construction of the . Deed Granting Easement." The trial court ruled in favor of appellees. However, the parties overlooked the dispositive question: Did a valid easement exist in the first place? See Winthrop v. Wadsworth, 42 So.2d 541, 543-44 (Fla.1949); One Harbor Fin. Ltd. Co. v. Hymes Props., LLC, 884 So.2d 1039, 1044 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Hensel v. Aurilio, 417 So.2d 1035, 1037 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); see also 2 William Blackstone, Commentaries *46-47; 20 Fla. Jur.2d Easements § 1 (2014).
Accordingly, the judgment below is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings as may be required to determine the issue.