Opinion ID: 2630723
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Did the District Judge Err in Finding an Easement by Prescription?

Text: The district judge also found that Thomas had an easement by prescription. The primary issue was whether Thomas's use of the driveway across the property of his son was adverse. Madsen argued that the family relationship between Thomas and his son should create a presumption that Thomas's use of the driveway was not adverse. He relied upon Cope v. Cope, 158 Mont. 388, 493 P.2d 336, 338 (1971) ([I]t is a general principle of law that members of a family may not acquire an easement by prescription against each other in the absence of a showing of a clear, positive, and continued disclaimer and disavowal of title.). Because we have upheld the implied easement by prior use, we need not address whether the facts also supported the district judge's finding that Thomas had obtained an easement by prescription.