Marla Ann Richardson v. Dianne M. Moore

Summary

The Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed a chancery court judgment establishing the boundary between neighboring properties and recognizing both a prescriptive easement and an easement by necessity for access to a shared driveway. The court held that the concurrent factual findings of the special master and trial court were supported by material evidence, including surveyor and witness testimony. The court also concluded that the driveway had been used openly, continuously, and adversely for more than the required prescriptive period.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not err in adopting the surveyor's determination of the boundary because the record supported the special master's and trial court's finding that the survey was credible and accurate.
2. Richardson established by clear and convincing evidence a prescriptive easement over the driveway for ingress and egress to her property, including use by construction vehicles and commercial farming equipment.
3. The court did not decide whether Richardson also had an easement by necessity because the prescriptive easement independently established her right to use the driveway.
4. Moore's appeal was unsuccessful but not frivolous, so Richardson was not entitled to attorney's fees and costs under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-1-122.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court erred in determining the boundary between the parties' properties based on the surveyor's testimony and survey.
2. Whether Richardson established an easement by necessity.
3. Whether Richardson established a prescriptive easement, including an easement permitting construction vehicles and commercial farming equipment to use the driveway.
4. Whether Moore's appeal was frivolous and warranted an award of attorney's fees and costs under Tennessee Code Annotated section 27-1-122.

Disposition

affirmed