HomeMy WebLinkAbout2847 i
1
I
i
'
i
•
~ ~
' . ~
~ ~ .
Howec•er, late in 1989, it received an inquiry f.rom Plaintiffs'
counsel on the status of its decisian. When the Court indicated
it ~as cvaiting on a response to its letter, that counsel
indicated a letter had been sent. Frankly, the Court never
recalls i-eceiving it. However, upon learning that a i-espons~ had
been sent, the Court finally tracked it down. It I~~as no idea
what ori_ginall~- happened to it. Again, it apologizes for the
dela~•.
"FItiDI'~GS"
In 1981, Pl.aintiffs acquired a 5 arre tract of land,
together with a 2U foot right-of-way access easement for ingt•ess
~ and egress fror.~ a state road to the ti•act of land. It appears
~ the easer.ient was originally created in the early 1970's when a
~
predecessor in title was sectioning-out pai-cels from a larger
tract. at the tirie of purchase, Plaintiffs' did not obtain a
i
survey. Rather, the}- utilized a survey sketch in pr,ssession of
the seller, which did not show the entire easement.
I Part of the access easernent granted to Plaintiffs runs
across Defendant's property. The ir~prover:~~nts on DPfendant`s
property include a small concrete block buildiny which was
originally buiit in the late 1940's or early 2950's. In the
t
1960's it was used as an apartment and Defendant. had lived in it~
with her late husband. In the 1970's it fell irito di_srepair and
thereafter had been used for storage, a play rooe~ and
misr_ellaneous utility purposes. Approxir~atelv or~e-third of the
stru~ture encroaches onto the easement in qt~esYion to such an
PXYPjIt th~t ene C~~r~ :~nly 6. ~ feet of the easer=~~nt is open.
In addition, the easetnent. area ir?nediately around the structure
gp01t~~~ PI',GE~O~~
. . _V :w:. _
F_ . _ . _ . _ _ . . _ . ~~-r~,"°`~~
~ ~~"~~t~~~~srt"~'~~"s~:i..`=~"" ~