QUAIL HOLLOW FARMS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
NEAL YOUNG AND SILVIA YOUNG, HIS WIFE, R.W. WELLS AND CORRINE WELLS, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Prescriptive Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Quail Hollow appeals the trial court’s denial of its complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief to establish prescriptive rights of ingress and egress over land owned by Young and Wells. We affirm.
The evidence adduced at this bench trial showed that an access road connecting a county road and property owned by Quail Hollow had been in existence and in continuous use for over twenty years. The access road passed through property owned by Young and Wells.
The critical evidence centered around whether the road in question was being used with or without the permission of Young and his predecessors in title. On this point, the evidence conflicted. Therefore, the trial court did not err in refusing to grant the relief sought since any doubts as to the creation of prescriptive rights must be resolved in favor of the landowner. Downing v. Bird, 100 So. 2d 57 (Fla.1958).
AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, J., and PEARSON, TILLMAN (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cook v. The Proctor & Gamble Cellulose Co., 648 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…use of the road by parties other than P & G was inconsistent with the owner’s use of the land. Downing v. Bird, supra. Doubts as to the creation of a prescriptive right must be resolved in favor of the land owner. Quail Hollow Farms, Inc. v. Young, 426 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Under Florida law, any use in common with the owner is presumed to be subordinate to the owner’s title and with the owner’s permission. Gibson v. Buice, 394 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). “Ah doubts as to the adverse character…
Authorities Cited
- Lottie Sykes Downing v. Bird, 100 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1958)