AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Skidmore v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co, No. 19-2482 (4th Cir. 2021)

3 Posts
3 Users
0 Reactions
400 Views
makerofmaps
(@makerofmaps)
Posts: 560
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

This one is great. We have railroads, a house in the right-of-way, drainage problems, mentions of adverse possession and more.......

?ÿ


 
Posted : June 16, 2021 9:44 am
bill93
(@bill93)
Posts: 9977
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

She should have dumped a load of rock on the eroding creek bank and never got into a conflict with the RR.

I don't see any discussion of whether the RR obtained the land in fee or as an easement. They are calling it a right of way which should imply an easement, but treating it as fee ownership.?ÿ Or that if it's a RR then the distinction doesn't matter?


 
Posted : June 16, 2021 10:05 am
dmyhill
(@dmyhill)
Posts: 3080
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

@bill93?ÿ

Don't pull (or start) on that thread. We will get into the wholesale theft of land into bike trails...and then we are only a short step into the abyss.?ÿ


 
Posted : June 16, 2021 11:17 am