Sackett v. O'Brien
| Citation | 23 N.Y.2d 883,298 N.Y.S.2d 86,245 N.E.2d 814 |
| Parties | , 245 N.E.2d 814 Thomas H. SACKETT, Respondent, v. John Lynn O'BRIEN et al., Appellants, and Elizabeth A. Pierce, Defendant. |
| Decision Date | 16 January 1969 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, 27 A.D.2d 979, 278 N.Y.S.2d 788.
J. Paul Brennan, Rochester, for appellants.
William L. Clay, Rochester, for respondent.
Action to quiet title to a strip of land. The Supreme Court, Trial Term, Monroe County, James C. O'Brien, J., 43 Misc.2d 476, 251 N.Y.S.2d 863, held that deed excepting and reserving for a roadway a strip on three sides of premises conveyed reserved an easement, but that easement was abandoned when roadway was never built and strip in question was used by adjoining lot owners for residential purposes and that by their acts they acquired title by adverse possession. The complaint was dismissed.
The plaintiff appealed. The Appellate Division held that the evidence established that defendants acquired an easement for access over certain lots in question, although as to two lots defendants did not acquire title to strip of land in question but only acquired an easement of access. The judgment was affirmed as modified.
The defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals.
Order affirmed, with costs.
All concur except BURKE, J., who dissents and votes to reverse and reinstate the judgment of the trial court on the ground that plaintiff's abandonment of the roadway destroyed his easement and defendants acquired title to the strip abutting their land by adverse possession free of any rights of the plaintiff.
KEATING, J., taking no part.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brant Lake Shores, Inc. v. Barton
...is equivalent to constructive possession of the whole. (Sackett v. O'Brien, 27 A.D.2d 979, 278 N.Y.S.2d 788, affm. 23 N.Y.2d 883, 298 N.Y.S.2d 86, 245 N.E.2d 814). The fact that the premises were used and occupied primarily during the summer months is immaterial because the use required by ......
-
People v. Helinski
...Riv. Dr. [Coogan], 307 N.Y. 447, 455, 121 N.E.2d 414, supra; Sackett v. O'Brien, 27 A.D.2d 979, 278 N.Y.S.2d 788, affd 23 N.Y.2d 883, 298 N.Y.S.2d 86, 245 N.E.2d 814). Plaintiff's citation to Long Island R.R. Co. v. Mulry, 212 N.Y. 108, 105 N.E. 806 and Corning v. Lehigh Val. R.R. Co., 14 A......
-
Ray v. Beacon Hudson Mountain Corp.
...463; Sackett v. O'Brien, 43 Misc.2d 476, 251 N.Y.S.2d 863, mod. on other grounds 27 A.D.2d 979, 278 N.Y.S.2d 788, affd. 23 N.Y.2d 883, 298 N.Y.S.2d 86, 245 N.E.2d 814; Brant Lake Shores v. Barton, 61 Misc.2d 902, 307 N.Y.S.2d 1005). Therefore, possession of a summer cottage during the summe......
-
Strawberry Lane, Inc. v. Fraser
...R.E. & I. Co. v. Hendrickson, 139 N.Y. 440, 445, 34 N.E. 1057; Sackett v. O'Brien, 27 A.D.2d 979, 278 N.Y.S.2d 788, affd. 23 N.Y.2d 883, 298 N.Y.S.2d 86, 245 N.E.2d 814). Put another way, defendants' proof has satisfied the purpose of the adverse possession statute by showing the existence ......