Will an easement be implied in favor of a grantor if the existence of pipes running through the grantee’s land is not mentioned in the conveyance or visible to the eye? (Van Sandt v. Royster)
Yes. An easement will be implied in favor of a grantor for sewer pipes running under the grantee’s land, because the grantee is charged with notice, as the existence of such pipes is apparent even if it is not visible.
In Van Sandt v. Royster, the court held that an easement will not be implied in favor of a grantor simply because the existence of pipes running through the grantee’s land is not mentioned in the conveyance or visible to the eye.
The court stated that the grantor must show both (1) a prior use of the easement and (2) a necessity of the easement. These two elements are required in order to imply an easement by necessity or implication.
Therefore, if the grantor can prove that there was a preexisting use of the easement prior to the conveyance, and that there is no alternative way to access the pipes, then an easement by implication may be created. However, if the grantor cannot prove both of these elements, then no easement will be implied.
More Answers:
Understanding the One Year Rule in Astronomy: The Key to Predicting Celestial Object Motion and PositionEssential Legal Documentation for Marriage: Everything You Need to Know
Understanding the MYLEGS Acronym: Key Components of Effective Experiments in Social Science Research.
Error 403 The request cannot be completed because you have exceeded your quota. : quotaExceeded