Court Opinion

ID: 9724754
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 11:11:40.079266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:05.461465
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE CHAPMAN, dissenting: The majority holds that the fact that Weihl was a tenant of the 40 acres upon which the road ran has no effect upon the permissive use of said road. I cannot agree with that conclusion. Since Weihl had the right to use the full 40 acres, he obviously had the right to use that portion of the land which comprised the road. His permissive use of the road under the tenancy for a period from 1961 through at least 1977 precludes Weihl from establishing the adverse use of the road for the requisite period of time. Therefore, the trial court erred when it found that a prescriptive easement had been created, and I would reverse.