Manbeck v. Jones

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania February 27, 1899

Manbeck v. Jones, 190 Pa. 171 (Pa. 1899)

42 A. 536; 1899 Pa. LEXIS 1001

Collum, Fell, Green, Mitchell, Stebrett

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

We find nothing in this record that would justify us in sustaining either of tbe specifications of error. The case was well tried, and the questions involved were correctly decided. For reasons given by tbe learned trial judge in his opinion, we are satisfied he was right in concluding that the plaintiff was entitled to equitable relief, and in adequately providing therefor by the terms of the decree from which tins appeal was taken. There appears to be nothing in any of the questions involved that requires extended discussion.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.

Reference

Full Case Name: William Manbeck v. Isaac Jones
Cited By: 34 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Easements— Ways— Obstruction. Where one party has a right of way through land of another to a public road, the latter is not justified in closing it by the fact that there is another way to such road. Ways~Easement — Bights of purchaser at sale — Equity. Where a continuous and apparent servitude is imposed by an owner on one part of his land for the benefit of another, a purchaser at private or judicial sale takes subject to the servitude. Where the vendor of a tract of land laid out a road from such tract through other land belonging to him, to a public road, and fenced it on both sides, and such road remained an open and visible way for twenty years, a purchaser of the tract through which it lies takes subject to the easement. Where a right to a way is not doubtful, but is clearly shown, equity has jurisdiction to compel the keeping open of the way, before a decision on the question of the right to the easement is had on the law side of the court. On a bill m equity to restrain interference with a road, if the testimony is such that, if submitted to a jury, the only finding could be in favor of the existence of the road, a court of equity has jurisdiction to enter a decree forbidding any obstruction of the road. The law does not offer an adequate remedy.