Morrill v. Recreational Development, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- SE SEMINOLE CIVIC ASS'N v. Adkins (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
- Collom v. Holton (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Thomas A. and Sarah S. MORRILL, Appellants,
v.
RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, INC., Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
*591 Thomas A. Morrill, in proper person.
James J. Richardson, Tallahassee, of counsel, Roberts, Baggett, LaFace, Richard & Wiser, P.A., Tallahassee, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The Morrills contend that appellee developer, who concedes their claim to an implied right-of-way across the developer's land under section 704.01(1), Florida Statutes (1981), has a duty to keep a portion of this right-of-way usable at all times. For purposes of this appeal, it is undisputed that the only possible location for this right-of-way is on land subject to periodic flooding. However, it is the long-established rule that the duty to improve or maintain an implied right-of-way or other easement rests on the owner of the easement, the Morrills in this case. 2 Thompson on Real Property § 428 at 666-68, 672 (1980).
Accordingly, the order of the trial court granting summary judgment for the developer on this count of appellants' complaint is AFFIRMED.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., and ERVIN and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.