Opinion ID: 1711020
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: testimony on intent to abandon

Text: At trial, Fuller testified that she never intended to abandon the right to use the tracks. The advertisement Stewart Seed ran for parcel C from 1988 to 1992 listed the property for sale with rail trackage. Adrian Woltkamp, former vice president of U.S. Cold, testified, and the district court found, that U.S. Cold paid the costs of rebuilding and has paid the cost for the maintenance of the tracks with no contribution from Stewart [Seed], though Stewart [Seed] was asked to do so. The only evidence adduced at trial was that in 1977, Stewart Seed refused to compensate U.S. Cold for reconstructing the tracks from two parallel tracks to a single track. Kratvill testified that when he last used the tracks in 1976, they were in adequate condition. In 1985, U.S. Cold installed a security fence and padlocked gates across the northern boundary of its property. The fence and gates crossed the railroad tracks, thereby blocking use of the tracks to the north. The record reflects that the fence that was constructed contained a swinging gate large enough for a train to pass through. In July 1992, U.S. Cold began removing the railroad tracks and ties on its property and began laying asphalt on the area. In December 1992, Hillary purchased parcel C from Fuller. There is no mention of an easement for rail access in the deed. Upon learning from U.S. Cold that it was U.S. Cold's belief that no easement existed over parcel B for the benefit of Hillary, Hillary renegotiated the price of parcel C with Fuller. Krueger, president of Hillary, testified that he planned to repair the tracks upon parcel C. After taking title to parcel C, Hillary filed this suit to establish the existence of an implied easement for rail access over parcel B.