Jones v. Daley, No. 3951.

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtWILLIAMS, J.
Citation609 S.E.2d 597,363 S.C. 310
PartiesBrenda JONES, Appellant, v. Lake W. DALEY, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 3951.
Decision Date22 February 2005

363 S.C. 310
609 S.E.2d 597

Brenda JONES, Appellant,
v.
Lake W. DALEY, Respondent

No. 3951.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard January 11, 2005.

Decided February 22, 2005.


363 S.C. 312
David S. Mathews, of Ridgeland, for appellant

R. Thayer Rivers, of Ridgeland, for respondent.

WILLIAMS, J.:

Brenda Jones appeals a special referee's decision that her use of Lake Daley's property for ingress and egress to her own property did not create an easement by prescription. We reverse and remand.

FACTS

In 1939, Thomas Washington acquired title to fifty acres of property in Jasper County. This property was divided and sold to unrelated parties in 1963, except for a five-acre parcel Thomas gave to his daughter, Jamie Washington. Ms. Washington granted her niece, Brenda Jones, a one-half interest in this parcel in 1982. In 1993, Jones was granted the remaining half interest, giving her full title to the five-acre property ("the Jones Parcel").

Throughout the Washington family's ownership of the Jones Parcel and the larger fifty-acre tract, the only access to the property was by use of a trail that followed the northern and eastern boundary of a two hundred acre parcel ("the Daley Parcel") situated between it and the nearest public road. This trail, the use of which is at issue in this case, followed the Daley Parcel's outer borders, but was situated entirely within the parcel's boundaries. Union Camp owned the Daley Parcel until 1987, when it was sold to Delta Plantation. In the late 1990s, Lake Daley purchased the two hundred acres from Delta Plantation.

363 S.C. 313
Jones's three uncles, who worked the Jones Parcel with their father, original owner Thomas Washington, all testified the family actively farmed the property from at least the early 1950s until 1959. At some point in the early 1950s, Union Camp plowed the preexisting access trail for the purpose of creating a firebreak. Following Union Camp's plowing, the Washingtons worked the plowed path with shovels, leveling out the newly cleared trail to make the path more suitable for ingress and egress to their property. Union Camp periodically plowed the firebreak, and each time the Washingtons reworked the trail to smooth it down for better travel. The Washingtons never requested permission to use the trail because they believed, since the trail was the only access to their property, they had a valid legal right to maintain and use it for ingress and egress. Union Camp, the Daley Parcel's owner for most of the time period at issue, was aware of the Washingtons' use and maintenance of the trail and fully condoned it for over thirty-five years

Because the Washingtons ceased farming the Jones Parcel around 1959, their use of the trail became less frequent in the decades that followed. They did, however, continue to periodically visit the property and maintain the trail following Union Camp's plowing. A nearby resident since the 1960s testified that the trail's use to reach "buried" property was common community knowledge. Jones, age 46, testified the trail was used by her family to access the parcel "as far back as [she] remembered," and she specifically recalls using the access herself since the 70s or 80s. Because Jones is not a South Carolina resident, however, her visits to the property, though many, were sporadic.

In the mid-1990s, Delta Plantation, then owner of the Daley Parcel, decided to close a road used by several other "buried" landowners that crossed directly over the two hundred acre property. To satisfy landowners who possessed recorded easements over the closed road, the access trail used by the Washington family was expanded into a full-sized road. An employee for Delta Plantation, who worked on the trail expansion, testified as to the state of the trail when they decided to build the new road. He stated he had maintained and expanded the firebreak since the beginning of his employment in 1987. Nevertheless, when asked if the new road was built

363 S.C. 314
over an existing road, he stated, "No ... there was a fireline, but just barely." He testified that by the mid-90s the trail was nothing more than a "deer trail." The employee conceded, however, that the path was about eight feet wide in places and would be traversable by a small tractor

Following the trail's expansion into a fully accessible road, all landowners with recorded easements over the closed road were granted written easements over the newly created one. Because Jones did not have a recorded easement to use the closed road, she was not granted a written easement to use the road built over her parcel's only access.1 Despite a survey her uncle commissioned in 1989 of the Jones Parcel which recommended a written easement be obtained from Daley, Jones maintained the belief that she had a right to use the newly created road.

In 2001, Jones attempted to haul timber from her parcel over the Daley Parcel's road. Daley objected to this activity. In 2002, Jones brought an action against Daley to declare an easement by prescription for ingress and egress over the road. The appointed special referee found no easement by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 practice notes
  • Ward v. West Oil Co., Inc., No. 4389.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 12 Mayo 2008
    ...correction of errors of law, and this court will not disturb the referee's factual findings if supported by any evidence. Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 314, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 I. West Oil's Right to Terminate the Contract at Will R&B avers the special referee erred in construing the Additi......
  • Floyd v. Floyd, No. 3997.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 13 Junio 2005
    ...the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review. Staubes v. City of Folly Beach, 339 S.C. 406, 529 S.E.2d 543 (2000); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 609 S.E.2d 597 (Ct.App.2005). "Imposing this preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the lower court to rule properly......
  • Paine Gayle Props., LLC v. CSX Transp., Inc., No. 5049.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 19 Diciembre 2012
    ...years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) that the use or enjoyment was adverse or under a claim of right. Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599–600 (Ct.App.2005). Additionally, a party claiming a prescriptive easement [400 S.C. 584]under a claim of right must s......
  • Sochko v. Sochko, 2007-UP-082
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 15 Febrero 2007
    ...time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review.”)); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 315, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 (Ct. App. 2005). Wife did not raise this argument to the family court. Additionally, Wife did not raise this issue ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
25 cases
  • Ward v. West Oil Co., Inc., No. 4389.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 12 Mayo 2008
    ...correction of errors of law, and this court will not disturb the referee's factual findings if supported by any evidence. Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 314, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 I. West Oil's Right to Terminate the Contract at Will R&B avers the special referee erred in construing the Ad......
  • Floyd v. Floyd, No. 3997.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 13 Junio 2005
    ...the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review. Staubes v. City of Folly Beach, 339 S.C. 406, 529 S.E.2d 543 (2000); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 609 S.E.2d 597 (Ct.App.2005). "Imposing this preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the lower court to rule pro......
  • Paine Gayle Props., LLC v. CSX Transp., Inc., No. 5049.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 19 Diciembre 2012
    ...years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) that the use or enjoyment was adverse or under a claim of right. Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599–600 (Ct.App.2005). Additionally, a party claiming a prescriptive easement [400 S.C. 584]under a claim of right must s......
  • Sochko v. Sochko, 2007-UP-082
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • 15 Febrero 2007
    ...time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review.”)); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 315, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 (Ct. App. 2005). Wife did not raise this argument to the family court. Additionally, Wife did not raise this issue ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT