Court Opinion

ID: 9600120
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:24:26.056831+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:49.468034
License: Public Domain

*80LEHMAN, Justice,
dissenting, with whom GOLDEN, Chief Justice, joins.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion.
The majority states:
The issue presented in this case is whether the substitution of cattle guards for gates on a right-of-way easement materially increases the burden on the servient estate. This is a question of law. Questions of law are reviewed de novo.
(Citation omitted and emphasis added.) I disagree with that standard of review.
Whether the owner of an easement enlarges or imposes a new burden on the servient estate is a question of fact. Courts dealing with this issue, McBride v. McBride, 581 P.2d 996, 998 (Utah 1978); Tanaka v. Sheehan, 589 A.2d 391, 396 n. 8 (D.C.App.1991); and even Mize v. Ownby, 225 S.W.2d 33 (Tenn.1949) upon which the majority relies, make reference to the facts in those individual cases. Review should be based upon the evidence; and when, as here, there is sufficient evidence to support the findings of the trial court, the result should be to affirm.