If the evidence supports the abandonment of the right of way for railroad purposes, does this showing displace the status of the 70 foot easements on either side of the Right of Way?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Ocean Shore R. Co. v. Doelger, 179 Cal.App.2d 222, 3 Cal.Rptr. 706 (Cal. App. 1960):
If, as we believe, the evidence supports the abandonment of the right of way for railroad purposes, this showing likewise disposes of the status of the 70 foot easements on either side of the right of way. By its own allegations the railroad acquired these 70 foot areas by prescription, utilizing them to support the right of way. The record indicates that the railroad used the 70 foot parcels only for the benefit of the dominant tenement, the right of way. In the light of the rule that 'when the language of a deed is ambiguous, and it does not clearly appear whether the easement was intended to be in gross or appurtenant to land, it is never construed as personal when it may fairly be construed as appurtenant to [179 Cal.App.2d 235] some other estate' (Elliott v. McCombs, 1941, 17 Cal.2d
Page 715
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
